Renfro Corp. v. Rita D. Collins ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                     COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present:   Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
    RENFRO CORPORATION
    AND
    HEWITT, COLEMAN & ASSOCIATES                  MEMORANDUM OPINION *
    PER CURIAM
    v.   Record No. 3010-95-3                        JULY 9, 1996
    RITA D. COLLINS
    FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
    (Deborah W. Dobbins; Gilmer, Sadler, Ingram,
    Sutherland & Hutton, on brief), for
    appellants.
    (Randolph D. Eley, Jr., on brief), for
    appellee.
    Renfro Corporation and its insurer (hereinafter collectively
    referred to as "employer") contend that the Workers' Compensation
    Commission erred in finding that Rita D. Collins ("claimant") (1)
    proved she sustained compensable injuries by accident; (2) proved
    her back condition and resulting disability were causally related
    to a compensable injury by accident; and (3) was not required to
    market her residual work capacity at certain points in time.
    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.
    On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
    *
    Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
    designated for publication.
    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
    order to carry [her] burden of proving an 'injury by accident,' a
    claimant must prove that the cause of [her] injury was an
    identifiable incident or sudden precipitating event and that it
    resulted in an obvious sudden mechanical or structural change in
    the body."    Morris v. Morris, 
    238 Va. 578
    , 589, 
    385 S.E.2d 858
    ,
    865 (1989).   We must uphold the commission's findings of fact if
    they are supported by credible evidence.    James v. Capitol Steel
    Constr. Co., 
    8 Va. App. 512
    , 515, 
    382 S.E.2d 487
    , 488 (1989).
    Claimant testified that, on October 22, 1994, when she
    attempted to arise from a stool, the stool stuck on the mat
    underneath it, causing her to fall backwards and hit her back,
    leg and head.   After the fall, her "hip was out."   A co-worker
    helped claimant get up.   Claimant sought immediate medical
    attention from Dr. Wiley A. Greene.   Dr. Greene diagnosed a
    lumbar sprain/strain with possible disc rupture.     Claimant
    admitted she had treated with Dr. Greene prior to October 22,
    1994 for back and head injuries sustained in a non-work-related
    August 25, 1994 incident.   After the August 25, 1994 incident,
    claimant returned to work on October 17, 1994 and performed her
    regular duties until the October 22, 1994 accident.    After the
    October 22, 1994 accident, claimant returned to her pre-injury
    work, without restrictions, on December 4, 1994.
    Claimant testified that, on January 24, 1995, she lifted a
    2
    conveyor belt and felt a pop in her lower back, causing increased
    back pain and leg numbness.   She sought treatment from Dr. Greene
    on the same day.   Dr. Greene diagnosed intervertebral disc
    disorder and lumbar spine sprain/strain.
    Claimant's testimony describing the October 22, 1994 and
    January 24, 1995 accidents was consistent with the descriptions
    she wrote on employer's accident forms.    The histories of these
    accidents, which Dr. Greene reported on his Attending Physician's
    Reports, are not inconsistent with claimant's testimony.
    Moreover, on January 25, 1995, claimant gave Dr. Robert B.
    Stephenson a history of the January 24, 1995 accident which is
    consistent with her hearing testimony.
    Claimant's testimony, which was corroborated by her reports
    to employer and the medical histories, constitutes credible
    evidence to support the commission's decision.   The commission,
    after observing the demeanor of the witnesses and reviewing the
    evidence, afforded greater probative weight to claimant's
    testimony than to the testimony of employer's witnesses.    It is
    well settled that the determination of a witness' credibility is
    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 this instance, whether claimant sustained injuries by
    accident arising out of and in the course of her employment
    depended largely upon the credibility of the witnesses.    The
    commission resolved any conflicts in the evidence in favor of
    3
    claimant.    "In determining whether credible evidence exists, the
    appellate court does not retry the facts, reweigh the
    preponderance of the evidence, or make its own determination of
    the credibility of the witnesses."      Wagner Enters., Inc. v.
    Brooks, 
    12 Va. App. 890
    , 894, 
    407 S.E.2d 32
    , 35 (1991).      Because
    credible evidence supports the commission's decision, we cannot
    find that the commission erred in holding that claimant proved
    she sustained injuries by accident arising out of and in the
    course of her employment on October 22, 1994 and January 24,
    1995.    "The fact that there is contrary evidence in the record is
    of no consequence if there is credible evidence to support the
    commission's decision."     
    Id. II. On
    January 25, 1995, Dr. Stephenson reported that claimant
    suffered "an exacerbation of a pre-existing low back and cervical
    strain with possible LLE radiculopathy."     Dr. James M. Leipzig
    noted that, after the January 24, 1995 accident, claimant began
    suffering from different symptoms.      Dr. Leipzig specifically
    noted that "the left leg component to this current flare is a new
    symptom to her."    On his March 15, 1995 Attending Physician's
    Report, Dr. Greene opined that claimant's intervertebral disc
    disorder and lumbar sprain/strain were due to the January 24,
    1995 accident.
    The uncontradicted opinion of Dr. Greene, coupled with the
    records of Drs. Stephenson and Leipzig, constitute credible
    4
    evidence to support the commission's decision that claimant
    proved that the January 24, 1995 injury by accident exacerbated
    her pre-existing back condition and resulted in her current
    symptoms and disability.
    III.
    On November 18, 1994, Dr. Stephenson released claimant to
    light duty work.    Claimant returned to her pre-injury work,
    without restrictions, on December 4, 1994.    Under the
    circumstances of this case, the commission ruled that it was not
    unreasonable for claimant to fail to market her residual work
    capacity during this short period of time.    We agree with the
    commission.    This issue is controlled by our decision in Holly
    Farms v. Carter, 
    15 Va. App. 29
    , 
    422 S.E.2d 165
    (1992).
    Accordingly, we cannot say as a matter of law that the commission
    erred in awarding claimant temporary total disability benefits
    from October 24, 1994 through December 3, 1994.
    On January 26, 1995, Dr. Greene opined that claimant was
    totally incapacitated.    He excused claimant from work until
    February 10, 1995.    On February 7, 1995, Dr. Leipzig opined that
    claimant should remain off work until March 7, 1995.      In a March
    15, 1995 Attending Physician's Report, Dr. Greene reported that
    claimant became totally disabled on January 24, 1995.     Dr. Greene
    did not know when claimant would be able to return to light duty
    work.    On March 24, 1995, Dr. Stephenson noted that claimant
    5
    suffered from "persistent pain in the low back," "diffuse
    numbness," and "increased stiffness."    Dr. Stephenson did not
    opine in this report that claimant could return to light or full
    duty.    Rather, he prescribed a neurology evaluation, an
    appointment with Dr. Jackson, and possible treatment at the
    Center for Behavioral Medicine.    Dr. Stephenson told claimant to
    continue with home exercises and activity as tolerated.
    Based upon this record, the commission could reasonably
    infer that claimant remained totally disabled after the January
    24, 1995 accident, and therefore, did not have a duty to market
    her residual capacity.    Accordingly, the commission did not err
    in awarding claimant temporary total disability benefits
    beginning January 24, 1995.
    For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
    Affirmed.
    6