4-370-776 (1998). SCARLETT L. LANOY.

• Case Date: December 17, 1998
• Court: Colorado

Colorado Workers Compensation 1998. 4-370-776 (1998). SCARLETT L. LANOY INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICEIN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF SCARLETT L. LANOY, Claimant, v. JOMAX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Employer, and ST. PAUL FIRE and MARINE INSURANCE, Insurer, Respondents.W. C. No. 4-370-776FINAL ORDER The respondents seek review of a final order of Administrative Law Judge Stuber (ALJ), which determined that Colorado has jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim, and awarded the claimant medical benefits. The respondents contend that the claimant's injury, which occurred in Texas, is not subject to Colorado jurisdiction because the claimant was not a citizen of Colorado, and because the claimant was not sent out of Colorado for "temporary work." Further, the respondents assert that the claimant was "laid off" in Colorado, and was not "rehired" until she reached Texas. We affirm. The claimant's husband operated a bulldozer for the respondent-employer (Jomax). In September, 1996, the claimant's husband was operating the bulldozer in Colorado. On September 3, 1996, Jomax hired the claimant as a laborer to assist her husband. The contract for hire was made in Colorado. At the time of the hiring the claimant completed substantial paperwork and was required to take a drug test. By November 1, 1996, the Jomax project in Colorado was nearly finished. Three employer witnesses, a "field secretary," a construction superintendent, and an office manager testified that the claimant and her husband were then "laid off." Nevertheless, the construction superintendent also testified that a job was soon to begin in Texas, and the claimant's husband would have work if he "showed up . . . when that job started." The field secretary testified that if the claimant's husband had work, the claimant would also have work in Texas. (Tr. p. 81). The claimant denied being "laid off" by the employer. To the contrary, the claimant testified that the superintendent advised her that she would have employment in Texas, but she also understood her per diem would decrease. The claimant was began work in Texas in November 1996. At that time, the claimant was not required to fill out any additional paperwork, and Jomax was unable to produce evidence that the claimant filled out a new W-4 form. The claimant sustained a back injury on December 11, 1996, while performing her job in Texas. Under these circumstances, the ALJ found that the claimant was "regularly employed" in Colorado, and that she sustained an injury within six months of leaving the state. Thus, the ALJ concluded that Colorado has jurisdiction over the Texas injury pursuant to § 8-41-204, C.R.S. 1998. Alternatively, the ALJ "assumed" that the claimant was "laid off" by Jomax on November 1, 1996. Despite...