1. WORKERS' COMPENSATION — Petition to Reopen — Became Final — Cannot Be Corrected — Refiling — Same Petition — Same Medical Report. Although there is no statutory limit on the number of times a petition to reopen a workmen's compensation claim may be filed, succeeding petitions must be based on new or different facts; thus, where denial of claimant's original petition to reopen had become final because of her failure to file a timely petition for review, such error in appellate procedure could not be corrected by simply refiling an identical petition to reopen accompanied by the same medical report.
Opinion by JUDGE ENOCH.
In 1965, Willdean B. Sump, petitioner, was injured in an industrial accident. An award for compensation was entered, and petitioner was rated as having a permanent partial disability of twenty-five percent (25%) as a working unit. This appeal is concerned only with petitioner's efforts to reopen the claim.
On January 13, 1972, petitioner filed a request to reopen his claim, supported by a letter from a physician who had examined petitioner and had found his condition to have deteriorated. This petition was denied by the Director of the Department of Labor, and the Industrial Commission affirmed the Director's order on June 30, 1972.
The next procedural step, required by 1971 Perm. Supp., C.R.S. 1963, 81-14-6(2), would have been to request the Commission to review its order. Instead, petitioner sought review in the Court of Appeals. When the jurisdictional defect became apparent, petitioner filed a motion in this court to withdraw his petition for review, which was granted, and the petition was accordingly dismissed.
On October 10, 1972, petitioner again filed with the Director a petition to reopen his claim, which was identical in form and substance to the one filed in January, 1972, and was accompanied by a copy of the same doctor's letter. That petition was also denied by the Director, and the Director's order was subsequently affirmed by the Commission. The petitioner then filed a petition with the Commission for review of its order, and from an adverse ruling the matter is now before this court again for review.
[1] Denial of the original petition to reopen became final when petitioner failed to file a petition to review the Commission's order of June 30, 1972. 1971 Perm. Supp., C.R.S. 1963, 81-14-7; Davis v. Industrial Commission, 161 Colo. 80, 420 P.2d 147. This error in appellate procedure cannot be corrected by simply refiling an identical petition to reopen accompanied by the same medical report. Although there is no statutory limit on the number of times a petition to reopen may be filed, succeeding petitions must be based on new or different facts. See Graden Coal Co. v. Yturralde, 137 Colo. 527, 328 P.2d 105.
Order affirmed.
JUDGE COYTE and JUDGE PIERCE concur.
Comments