Opinion
W.C. No. 4-383-141
March 17, 2000
FINAL ORDER
The claimant seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Martinez (ALJ) insofar as it failed to include the value of veterinary services when calculating the claimant's average weekly wage. We affirm.
This matter was before us previously. In our Order of Remand dated August 31, 1999, we held that the value of the veterinary services cannot be included in the claimant's average weekly wage because the services are not an enumerated fringe benefit which may be included in the average weekly wage under § 8-40-201(19)(b), C.R.S. 1999. We also held that the veterinary services did not have a "reasonable, present-day, cash equivalent value" because the claimant admitted the value of the services depended on her actual usage and could decline over time. See City of Lamar v. Koehn, 968 P.2d 164 (Colo.App. 1998). Consequently, we set aside the ALJ's prior order and directed him to determine the claimant's average weekly wage without regard to the value of the veterinary services. Pursuant to our direction the ALJ entered an order dated October 18, 1999, which determined the claimant's average weekly wage without regard to the veterinary services.
On appeal, the claimant takes issue with our Order of Remand and argues that the veterinary services have a "reasonable, present-day, cash equivalent value" sufficient to be considered "wages" for purposes of Meeker v. Provident Health Partners, 929 P.2d 26 (Colo.App. 1996). However, as we pointed out in our Order of Remand, the veterinary services did not have a present-day, cash equivalent value because the "valuation" depends on the claimant's actual usage. Thus, the relative value of such services may diminish over time, and veterinary services are certainly not convertible to cash as was the case with PET time in Meeker. Therefore, we again conclude that this case is controlled by the holding in City of Lamar v. Koehn, supra, and none of the claimant's arguments is persuasive.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ's order dated October 18, 1999, is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL ________________________________ David Cain ________________________________ Kathy E. Dean
NOTICE
This Order is final unless an action to modify or vacate this Order is commenced in the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2 East 14th Avenue, Denver, CO 80203, by filing a petition for review with the Court, within twenty (20) days after the date this Order is mailed, pursuant to § 8-43-301(10) and § 8-43-307, C.R.S. 1999. The appealing party must serve a copy of the petition upon all other parties, including the Industrial Claim Appeals Office, which may be served by mail at 1515 Arapahoe, Tower 3, Suite 350, Denver, CO 80202.
Copies of this decision were mailed March 17, 2000 to the following parties:
Pamela Vliek, 642 B 33-3/4 Rd., Clifton, CO 81520
Animal Medical Clinic, P.C., 504 Fruitvale Ct., Grand Junction, CO 81504-5768
Laurie A. Schoder, Esq., Colorado Compensation Insurance Authority d/b/a Pinnacol Assurance — Interagency Mail (For Respondents)
Luke A. Brennan, Esq., 123 N. 7th St., #130, P.O. Box 579, Grand Junction, CO 81502 (For Claimant)
David Smith, Esq., 600 17th St., #1600N, Denver, CO 80202
BY: A. Pendroy