Legal Opinion
Hillebrand Construction Co. v. Worf
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided April 13, 1989No. 88CA1270PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ENOCH, * Judge.
Hillebrand Construction Company and the State Compensation Insurance Authority (petitioners) seek review of a final order of the Industrial Claim Appeals Office (Panel) which determined that there was no jurisdictional defect in a supplemental order entered by an Administrative Law Judge (AU) after the thirty-day time limit imposed by § 8-53-111(3), C.R.S. (1988 Cum.Supp.). We set aside the Panel’s order.
On May 11, 1987, the AU entered an order awarding Keith Worf (claimant) $10,-111.90 in permanent partial disability benefits. Claimant timely filed a petition to review…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Canton Oil Corp. v. District Court In & For Second Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- Sanchez v. StraightColorado Court of Appeals · 1978
- Bauer v. State, Department of Revenue, Division of Motor VehiclesColorado Court of Appeals · 1986
- Michalski v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeColorado Court of Appeals · 1988
3Cited by6 opinions
- and 14CA1436. People v. HarrisColorado Court of Appeals · 2016
- AVIADO v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeColorado Court of Appeals · 2009
- Langton v. Rocky Mountain Health Care Corp.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1996
- Estate of Guido v. Exempla, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2012
- Monfort Transp. v. INDUS. CLAIM APP. OFF.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.