Walter Everett Childress v. Appalachian Power Company ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present: Judges Kelsey, Petty and Senior Judge Bumgardner
    WALTER EVERETT CHILDRESS
    MEMORANDUM OPINION*
    v.     Record No. 0117-06-3                                          PER CURIAM
    OCTOBER 17, 2006
    APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY
    FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION
    (Walter E. Childress, pro se, on brief).
    (Richard D. Lucas; Lucas Law Firm, PLC, on brief), for appellee.
    Walter Everett Childress (claimant) appeals decisions of the Workers’ Compensation
    Commission dated June 5, 2003, November 4, 2004, and March 3, 2006.1 Claimant’s brief
    contains eleven Questions Presented, three of which are marked as “Withdrawn,” and
    corresponding lengthy argument related to those questions. Claimant contends (1) he was denied
    due process; (2) the commission erred in finding no evidence of an equipment malfunction
    during claimant’s August 30, 2002 hearing and no prejudice to claimant; (3) the commission
    erred in not allowing claimant to withdraw his claim; (4) the commission erred in adjudicating
    certain claims of which claimant had no notice; (5) the commission was biased towards claimant;
    (6) a deputy commissioner should not be allowed to hear a case and then let another deputy
    commissioner hear parts of the case or discuss the case with an outside party; and (7) once
    Appalachian Power Company (employer) admitted it owed claimant monies or admitted medical
    *
    Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
    1
    This Court in previous appeals ruled the June 5, 2003 and November 4, 2004 opinions
    were interlocutory.
    treatment was related to the injury, it was unnecessary for him to prove his case. In summarily
    affirming the commission’s decisions, we have considered only those questions and arguments
    that were raised before the commission, germane to the decisions appealed from, and considered
    by the commission in those decisions.2
    In so doing, we have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinions and find that
    this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in
    its opinions dated June 5, 2003, November 4, 2004, and March 3, 2006. See Childress v.
    Appalachian Power Company, VWC File No. 120-42-06 (June 5, 2003, Nov. 4, 2004, and Mar.
    3, 2006). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.
    Affirmed.
    2
    We also note that in his brief, claimant did not challenge the underlying merits of the
    commission’s June 5, 2003 ruling affirming the deputy commissioner’s findings that claimant
    failed to prove employer was responsible for certain mileage reimbursement, prescription drug
    costs, and medical expenses. Accordingly, the commission’s finding in that regard is binding
    and conclusive upon us on appeal. See Rule 5A:18.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 0117063

Filed Date: 10/17/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021