4-350-366 (1998). DAVID DEHERRERA.

• Case Date: August 24, 1998
• Court: Colorado

Colorado Workers Compensation 1998. 4-350-366 (1998). DAVID DEHERRERA INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICEIN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF DAVID DEHERRERA, Claimant, v. ALCON CONSTRUCTION, INC., Employer, and LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Insurer, Respondents.W. C. No. 4-350-366FINAL ORDER The respondents seek review of a final order of Administrative Law Judge Wheelock (ALJ), which awarded the claimant temporary disability and medical benefits. The respondents argue that the record lacks substantial evidence to support the ALJ's finding that the claimant's disability and need for treatment is causally related to the industrial injury. We affirm. The ALJ credited the claimant's testimony that he injured his right arm on July 16, 1997, while pulling it away from a falling grain bin. Moreover, the ALJ credited the claimant's testimony that, by August 1, 1997, pain in the arm rendered him unable to work. The ALJ recognized that there was conflicting evidence concerning whether or not the July 16 injury was the cause of the claimant's subsequent disability. However, the ALJ was unpersuaded by the respondents' evidence because the claimant's testimony was supported by the medical record. Moreover, as the ALJ pointed out, even the respondents' witnesses did not deny that an injury occurred on July 16. Thus, the ALJ awarded temporary disability benefits and medical benefits commencing August 1, 1997. On review, the respondents contend there is not substantial evidence to support the ALJ's finding of causal relationship between the July 16 injury and the August 1 disability and need for treatment. In support, the respondents point out that several witnesses contradicted the claimant's testimony concerning the exact time of the accident, whether the accident caused the claimant to "slow down" his work, and whether the claimant subsequently reported pain. The respondents also rely on the fact that the claimant was able to continue working until July 25, 1997. Finally, the respondents argue that the evidence compels the conclusion that "something happened" to the claimant between the time he left work and the time he became disabled on August 1. We disagree. The question of whether an industrial injury is the cause of a disability and subsequent need for treatment is generally one of fact for determination by the ALJ. City of Durango v...