4-369-278 (1998). DANIELLE M. GRIGSBY (Final Order 1).

Case DateDecember 18, 1998
CourtColorado
Colorado Workers Compensation 1998. 4-369-278 (1998). DANIELLE M. GRIGSBY (Final Order 1) INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICEIN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF DANIELLE M. GRIGSBY, Claimant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Employer, and INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Insurer, Respondents.W. C. No. 4-369-278FINAL ORDER The respondents seek review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Martinez (ALJ) which determined that the claimant sustained a compensable neck injury and awarded medical benefits. We affirm. The ALJ found that "on or about December 1, 1996," the claimant suffered a compensable injury to her upper extremities from the duties of her employment which required repetitive movements and heavy lifting. Crediting the testimony of the claimant and Dr. Krebs, the ALJ further found that the claimant developed neck problems as a result of the industrial injury. Consequently, the ordered the respondents to provide treatment to evaluate and treat the claimant's neck condition. On review the respondents do not dispute that the claimant suffered a compensable injury to her upper extremities. However, the respondents contest the ALJ's finding that the claimant's neck pain is a compensable component of that injury. The respondents contend that there is no evidence the claimant sustained an accidental injury or occupational disease affecting her neck. We disagree. The ALJ did not find, and the claimant does not contend that her neck condition is the result of an accidental injury. See (Tr. p. 43). Rather, the ALJ found that the claimant suffered a neck injury in the nature of an occupational disease. Section 8-40-201(14), C.R.S. 1998, defines an occupational disease as one resulting directly from the conditions under which the work was performed, which follows as a natural incident of the work, can be fairly traced to the employment as a "proximate cause and which does not come from a hazard to which the worker would have been equally exposed outside the employment." Under this statute, the claimant bears the burden of proof to establish that a disease was directly and proximately caused by the employment. Standard Metals Corp. v. Ball, 172 Colo. 510, 474 P.2d 622 (Colo. App. 1970). The question of whether the claimant has sustained her burden of proof is a factual determination for resolution by the ALJ. Coven v...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT