54 Van Natta 37 (2002). TIMOTHY TROUPE, Claimant.

• Case Date: January 16, 2002
• Court: Oregon

Oregon Worker Compensation 2002. 54 Van Natta 37 (2002). TIMOTHY TROUPE, Claimant 37In the Matter of the Compensation of TIMOTHY TROUPE, ClaimantWCB Case No. 00-01864ORDER ON REVIEWErnest M Jenks, Claimant AttorneysBostwick Et Al, Defense AttorneysReviewing Panel: Members Haynes, Bock, and Phillips Polich. MemberPhillips Polich dissents. Claimant requests review of that portion of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Thye's order that declined to award an attorney fee pursuant to ORS 656.386(1). On review, the issue is attorney fees. We adopt and affirm the ALJ's order with the following supplementation and correction. Claimant compensably injured his left shoulder on September 29, 1999. The claim was accepted as a left shoulder strain. Claimant's attorney wrote the insurer on February 2, 2000 and requested acceptance of claimant's left shoulder tendinitis. The letter contended that the condition had been incorrectly omitted from the Notice of Acceptance. On March 2, 2000, claimant's attending physician concurred with a statement from the insurer to the effect that the doctor believed that the diagnoses of tendinitis were encompassed within the medical term "strain" and that the insurer's acceptance of a "disabling left shoulder strain" reasonably apprised the claimant and medical providers of the nature of his compensable condition. On March 3, 2000, the insurer wrote claimant's attorney and stated, in part: "We hereby decline to amend the acceptance of this claim as the current acceptance of a disabling left shoulder strain encompasses and reasonably apprises [claimant] and his medical providers of the nature of his compensable condition." Thereafter, claimant requested a hearing alleging a "de facto" denial of left shoulder tendinitis and rotator cuff tendinitis. The ALJ concluded that the Notice of Acceptance should be amended to include tendinitis. The ALJ also declined to award an attorney fee pursuant to ORS 656.386(1) on the ground that there was no statutory basis on which to award an attorney fee. 54 Van Natta 37 (2002)38On Board review, claimant contends that the insurer failed to properly revise the Notice of Acceptance or provide clarification of its acceptance for the condition. Claimant argues that he is entitled to an attorney fee under ORS 656.386(1). The insurer asserts that the claim...