54 Van Natta 33 (2002). AARON R. ADEE, Claimant.

• Case Date: January 14, 2002
• Court: Oregon

Oregon Worker Compensation 2002. 54 Van Natta 33 (2002). AARON R. ADEE, Claimant 33In the Matter of the Compensation of AARON R. ADEE, ClaimantWCB Case No. 01-02912ORDER ON REVIEWGlen J Lasken, Claimant AttorneysVavrosky Maccoll Olson Et Al, Defense AttorneysReviewing Panel: Members Haynes, Bock, and Biehl. Member Biehl chose not to sign the order. The self-insured employer requests review of those portions of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Tenenbaum's order that: (1) set aside its denial of claimant's current condition; (2) awarded an assessed fee under ORS 656.386(1); and (3) assessed an attorney fee under ORS 656.382(1) for the employer's allegedly unreasonable claim processing. On review, the issues are compensability and attorney fees. We reverse in part and affirm in part. FINDINGS OF FACT Claimant sustained a compensable low back injury in March 1999, which the employer accepted as a disabling lumbar strain with disc herniations at L3-4 and L4-5. After claimant underwent surgery in December 1999, the employer closed the claim in March 2000 by Notice of Closure that awarded temporary disability and 30 percent unscheduled permanent disability. (Ex. 40). In January 2001, Dr. Pribnow filed an aggravation claim form. An MRI scan taken that month revealed recurrent disc protrusions at L3-4 and L4-5 and a "persistent prominent protrusion L5-S1, unchanged." (Ex. 46A). On February 20, 2001, the employer issued a denial, citing receipt of the aggravation claim and reciting that the medical records indicated that claimant's "present clinical situation is different from what you were treated for in December of 1999." Therefore, the employer stated that "we must respectfully deny your aggravation claim and your current condition." The denial letter concluded by stating that claimant was entitled to palliative care and "medical" for the accepted injury. (Ex. 50). Claimant requested a hearing from the denial. 54 Van Natta 33 (2002)34CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND OPINION Prior to the scheduled hearing, the parties agreed to have the matter resolved without necessity of a hearing based on "stipulated facts" and oral arguments.1 At some point, claimant withdrew the aggravation claim. Claimant contended, however, that the employer's denial letter denied his then current condition. The employer took the position that its denial...