A claim was then filed and forwarded to the employer, who disapproved payment on January 4, 1995. The following day Melrose filed a motion for appointment of counsel. In the meantime, the employer filed no request for a hearing, thereby withdrawing its objection to payment of the claim. In addition, the district court found it improper to award attorney fees for the appeal to the district court because the only issue on appeal was the denial of previously awarded attorney fees. In order to resolve this case, we must interpret the Worker's Compensation Act with respect to when a worker's right to paid legal representation accrues and apply that interpretation to the facts.
Statutory interpretation is a matter of law and is reviewed de novo.
An appointed attorney shall be paid according to the order of the hearing examiner either from the worker's compensa tion account, from amounts awarded to the employee or claimants or from the employer. The Act is silent as to when an employee's right to paid legal representation accrues. It is our task, then, to determine the legislature's intent in that regard. The Division asserts that unless and until a formal request for a hearing is made, and the case is subsequently referred to the OAH by the Division, a hearing examiner has no authority to appoint an attorney or award fees. The Division's argument assumes that the hearing examiner's authority to appoint an attorney is necessarily dependent on the jurisdiction of the OAH to decide the underlying disputed claim on its merits.