v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office

COLOCTAPPSeptember 12, 2019No. 18CA2308, Packard

Defendant WinCity and County of Denver

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: appeal from Industrial Claim Appeals Office panel decision affirming dismissal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Workers’ Compensation

Outcome

Colorado appellate court affirmed dismissal of firefighter's workers' compensation claim for melanoma as time-barred under CRS § 8-43-103(2), finding claimant failed to file notice claiming compensation within two years of discovering the work-related nature of his injury.

Excerpt

Claimant is a firefighter for the City and County of Denver (the City). In July 2013, he was diagnosed with cancer, and on July 24, 2013, he advised the City of his cancer diagnosis and asserted his belief that the melanoma was related to or caused by his work as a City firefighter. Claimant filed an application for hearing on October 6, 2017, seeking medical and temporary total disability benefits. The City admitted compensability, but asserted a statute of limitations defense, arguing that the claim was barred because claimant filed his application more than four years after learning of his melanoma and reporting it to the City. A panel of the Industrial Claim Appeals Office (Panel) agreed with the City, and the claim was dismissed as time barred. On appeal, claimant contended that the Panel misinterpreted the applicable statute of limitations, CRS § 8-43-103(2). He argued that the City had adequate notice of his intent to pursue compensation through the Division of Workers' Compensation's (Division) assignment of a claim number to the case, the City's filing of certain forms, and his filing of several documents. CRS § 8-43-103(2) requires a claimant seeking workers' compensation to file a "notice claiming compensation" within two years of discovering the work-related nature of the claimant's injuries, or within three years if the claimant can establish a reasonable excuse for late filing and the employer suffered no prejudice as a result. The Division's assignment of a claim number does not satisfy a claimant's obligation to notify the Division and the employer of his or her intent to seek compensation, and none of the documents claimant points to specifies that claimant was seeking compensation as that term is defined in CRS § 8-43-103. Based on claimant's admission that he knew in 2013 that his firefighting duties may have caused his melanoma, he needed to file his claim by 2015 to comply with the two-year statute of limitations, or by 2016 if he could establis

What This Ruling Means

**Firefighter Loses Cancer Benefits Due to Late Filing** This case involved a Denver firefighter who developed melanoma (skin cancer) and believed it was caused by his job. In July 2013, he was diagnosed with cancer and told his employer he thought it was work-related. However, he didn't file his workers' compensation claim until October 2017 – more than four years later. The city agreed that the cancer was work-related but argued the firefighter had waited too long to file his claim. Colorado law requires workers to file for compensation within two years of discovering their injury is connected to their job. The court agreed with the city and dismissed the firefighter's claim, even though his cancer was job-related. **What This Means for Workers:** This ruling highlights a critical timing rule in workers' compensation cases. Even if your injury or illness is clearly work-related, you can lose your right to benefits if you don't file your claim within the legal deadline. In Colorado, you have two years from when you discover (or reasonably should have discovered) that your condition is work-related. Workers should file claims promptly after making this connection, rather than waiting years, to protect their rights to medical treatment and disability benefits.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Workers’ Compensation cases

Similar Rulings

Read Full Opinion More City and County of Denver Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.