Michael Ray Manes v. TCB Construction ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                      COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present:    Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis
    MICHAEL RAY MANES
    MEMORANDUM OPINION *
    v.   Record No. 0862-96-2                           PER CURIAM
    SEPTEMBER 24, 1996
    TCB CONSTRUCTION, INC.
    AND
    ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE
    FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
    (Michael R. Manes, pro se, on brief).
    (Benjamin J. Trichilo; Trichilo, Bancroft,
    McGavin, Horvath & Judkins, on brief), for
    appellees.
    Michael Ray Manes contends that the Workers' Compensation
    Commission erred in finding that (1) he was not a credible
    witness; (2) his right carpal tunnel syndrome and current
    disability are not causally related to his July 6, 1993 injury by
    accident; and (3) he failed to market his residual capacity.
    Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties, we
    conclude that this appeal is without merit.     Accordingly, we
    summarily affirm the commission's decision.     Rule 5A:27.
    I.
    It is well-settled that credibility determinations are
    within the fact finder's exclusive purview.     Goodyear Tire &
    Rubber Co. v. Pierce, 
    5 Va. App. 374
    , 381, 
    363 S.E.2d 433
    , 437
    (1987).    In reviewing the commission's decision, we do not
    *
    Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
    designated for publication.
    consider any medical reports which were not properly before it.
    Based upon Manes' failure to reveal his 1983 work accident and
    his pre-July 6, 1993 bilateral carpal tunnel symptoms, as well as
    other discrepancies between his assertions of total disability
    and the medical records, the commission was entitled to conclude
    that Manes' testimony was not credible.
    II.
    On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
    to the prevailing party below.    R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v.
    Mullins, 
    10 Va. App. 211
    , 212, 
    390 S.E.2d 788
    , 788 (1990).    In
    holding that Manes failed to prove that his right carpal tunnel
    syndrome was caused by his July 6, 1993 injury by accident, the
    commission found as follows:
    Dr. [Robert] Rutkowski opined that [Manes']
    carpal tunnel syndrome was not causally
    related to his compensable injury by accident
    on July 6, 1993. In an October 13, 1994
    report, Dr. [George N.] Stergis indicated
    that "given the absence of pre-existing
    complaints or alternative explanations,"
    [Manes'] carpal tunnel syndrome is causally
    related to his employment. It is obvious
    from this report that Dr. Stergis was unaware
    of [Manes'] complaints of right wrist pain as
    early as 1986. After viewing a portion of
    the hearing transcript, Dr. Stergis concluded
    that [Manes] has a pre-existing history of
    carpal tunnel syndrome.
    After a thorough review of the medical
    record, it appears that none of the
    physicians involved in this matter indicate
    within a reasonable degree of medical
    certainty that [Manes'] right carpal tunnel
    syndrome is causally related to the July 6,
    1993 incident.
    The commission's findings are fully supported by the medical
    2
    records.        "Questions raised by conflicting medical opinions must
    be decided by the commission."        Penley v. Island Creek Coal Co.,
    
    8 Va. App. 310
    , 318, 
    381 S.E.2d 231
    , 236 (1989).       Moreover, in
    its role as fact finder, the commission was entitled to determine
    what weight, if any, was to be given to the various medical
    opinions in the record.       "It lies within the commission's
    authority to determine the facts and the weight of the evidence
    . . . ."        Rose v. Red's Hitch & Trailer Servs., Inc., 
    11 Va. App. 55
    , 60, 
    396 S.E.2d 392
    , 395 (1990).        Credible evidence in the
    record supports the commission's finding that Manes did not bear
    his burden of proving that his right carpal tunnel syndrome and
    continuing disability were related to his July 6, 1993 injury by
    1
    accident.
    III.
    "In determining whether a claimant has made a reasonable
    effort to market his remaining work capacity, we view the
    evidence in the light most favorable to . . . the prevailing
    party before the commission . . . ."        National Linen Serv. v.
    McGuinn, 
    8 Va. App. 267
    , 270, 
    380 S.E.2d 31
    , 32 (1989).          A
    claimant still has the burden of proving his entitlement to
    benefits, and to do that he has the burden of proving that he
    1
    We recognize that the Supreme Court ruled in Stenrich Group
    v. Jemmott, 
    251 Va. 186
    , 199, 
    467 S.E.2d 795
    , 802 (1996), that
    carpal tunnel syndrome is not compensable as an occupational
    disease if it is caused by repetitive motion. However, employer
    did not raise the issue of whether Manes' condition constituted a
    disease before the commission. Accordingly, we do not address
    this issue on appeal.
    3
    made a reasonable effort to procure suitable work but was unable
    to market his remaining work capacity.   Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co.
    v. Bateman, 
    4 Va. App. 459
    , 464, 
    359 S.E.2d 98
    , 100 (1987).
    Relying upon Dr. Stergis' October 13, 1994 report, the
    commission found that Manes was only partially incapacitated.   In
    light of medical records supporting the commission's decision
    that Manes was at most partially disabled and in light of his
    failure to provide evidence of his marketing efforts, we hold
    that credible evidence supports the commission's finding.
    For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the commission's
    decision.
    Affirmed.
    4