Opinion
Aug. 20, 1974.
Editorial Note:
This case has been marked 'not for publication' by the court.
John P. Moore, Atty. Gen., John E. Bush, Deputy Atty. Gen., Peter L. Dye, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent Industrial Commission of Colorado.
Margaret Bates Ellison, Denver, for petitioners.
John E. Kochenburger, Fort Collins, for respondent C. Earl Duntz.
COYTE, Judge.
Claimant, while lifting a heavy refrigerator in October 1968, suffered a heart attack. He filed a claim with the Industrial Commission and was awarded 20% permanent partial disability. His employer and its insurance company seek this review contending that there is no evidence in the record to support the 20% Award and that the findings made by the commission are insufficient to support the award. We affirm.
After claimant filed his claim, the Industrial Commission sent a notice to all parties for a hearing to determine (1) whether claimant had suffered an accident, (2) what, if any, period of temporary total disability he had sustained, and (3) what, if any, degree of permanent disability he had sustained. At this hearing, claimant's physician testified as to certain limitations on claimant's activities and then testified, as follows:
'Q. Based upon your examination and treatment of Mr. Duntz, do you feel that he has any degree of partial disability?
A. It's my opinion that he does have some partial disability.
Q. And what disability would you assess to Mr. Duntz?
A. I feel that as an individual trying to assume a job, he would probably be 20 percent disabled.'
No other medical opinion appears in the record relative to the extent of claimant's permanent disability.
The referee found that there had been no accident and denied compensation. On appeal, the commission set aside the findings and order of the referee and entered its own finding that claimant was able to return to work and had a permanent partial disability equivalent to 20% As a working unit. As stated in Colorado Fuel & Iron Corp. v. Industrial Commission, 151 Colo. 18, 379 P.2d 153:
"In determining the Extent or degree of disability of an injured workman upon the facts of each case, it is axiomatic that the Industrial Commission is vested with the Widest possible discretion with the exercise of which the courts will not interfere. . . . Also the presumption exists that in making an award . . . the commission considered and gave due weight to all of the factors therein enumerated.' Byouk v. Industrial Commission, 106 Colo. 430, 105 P.2d 1087. (Emphasis supplied.)'
Applying this principle, the medical evidence and clear inferences to be drawn therefrom are sufficient to support the award.
Petitioners also contend that the findings of the Commission are inadequate to support the award. We disagree. The findings, while short and to the point, adequately resolved the issue of permanent partial disability before the commission and are consistent with the rule in Crandall v. Watson-Wilson Transportation System, Inc., 171 Colo. 329, 467 P.2d 48.
Order affirmed.
SILVERSTEIN, C.J., and RULAND, J., concur.