Legal Opinion

Subsequent Injury Fund v. Grant

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided June 24, 1991No. 89CA1428PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge PIERCE.

The Subsequent Injury Fund (SIF) seeks review of a final order of the Industrial Claim Appeals Office (Panel) which ordered it to pay 70% of the permanent total disability benefits payable to claimant, Daryl Grant. We affirm.

Claimant was rendered permanently and totally disabled from the combined effect of a prior back injury, preexisting industrial carpal tunnel syndrome, and a subsequent industrial injury to his shoulder. The Panel determined that 50% of claimant’s disability was attributable to the prior back injury, 20% was attributable to the preexisting carpal…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Ingram v. CooperSupreme Court of Colorado · 1985
  2. Frohlick Crane Service, Inc. v. MacKSupreme Court of Colorado · 1973
  3. Gelco Courier v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF STATEColorado Court of Appeals · 1985
  4. Ragsdale Bros. Roofing, Inc. v. United Bank of Denver, N.A.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. Casa Bonita Restaurant v. Industrial CommissionColorado Court of Appeals · 1981

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Climax Molybdenum Co. v. WalterSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
  2. Niemet v. General Electric Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Subsequent Injury Fund v. GrantColorado Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Electron Corp. v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeColorado Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. In re the Marriage of CargillColorado Court of Appeals · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API