Food Lion, Inc. v. Brian D. Betts ( 1997 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
FOOD LION, INC.
MEMORANDUM OPINION *
v. Record No. 1105-97-1 PER CURIAM
SEPTEMBER 9, 1997
BRIAN D. BETTS
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(William B. Pierce, Jr.; William F. Karn;
Pierce & Howard, on brief), for appellant.
(Johnny C. Cope; Saunders, Cope, Olson &
Yoffy, on brief), for appellee.
Food Lion, Inc. (employer) contends that the Workers'
Compensation Commission (commission) erred in finding that Brian
D. Betts (claimant) proved he sustained an injury by accident
arising out of his employment on June 9, 1996. Upon review of
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.
On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
to the prevailing party below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v.
Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). "To
prove the 'arising out of' element, [in a case involving injuries
sustained from falling . . . at work, claimant] must show that a
condition of the workplace either caused or contributed to [his]
fall." Southside Virginia Training Ctr. v. Shell, 20 Va. App.
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
199, 202, 455 S.E.2d 761, 763 (1995) (citing County of
Chesterfield v. Johnson, 237 Va. 180, 184, 376 S.E.2d 73, 76
(1989)). "Whether an injury arises out of the employment is a
mixed question of law and fact and is reviewable by the appellate
court." Plumb Rite Plumbing Serv. v. Barbour, 8 Va. App. 482,
483, 382 S.E.2d 305, 305 (1989).
In ruling that claimant's injuries arose out of his
employment, the commission found as follows:
[Claimant] was jogging to the
freezer area, when he slipped and
fell. He believes he slipped in
some condensation which frequently
develops next to the freezer. He
has seen this condensation on many
occasions, and although he did not
document the presence of water on
this particular occasion, the fact
that something caused him to slip
and break his foot suggests the
presence of a slippery substance
which was likely water. The
employer conceded that condensation
tends to develop on the floor in
the freezer area. The credible and
uncontradicted evidence as a whole
establishes that the claimant
jogged into an area of the floor
which had some condensation on it,
causing him to slip. . . . [T]he
claimant in this situation need not
identify any particular substance
or hazard that caused his fall,
when the evidence preponderates to
show that the fall was precipitated
by his hurried actions for the
benefit of the employer and by the
damp floor.
Claimant's testimony constitutes credible evidence to
support the commission's factual findings. Based upon these
2
findings, the commission could reasonably infer that the
claimant's employment-related need to hurry and the damp floor
caused him to slip and fall, which resulted in his injuries.
"Where reasonable inferences may be drawn from the evidence in
support of the commission's factual findings, they will not be
disturbed by this Court on appeal." Hawks v. Henrico County Sch.
Bd., 7 Va. App. 398, 404, 374 S.E.2d 695, 698 (1988). Here, the
evidence supported an inference that conditions of the workplace
either caused or contributed to claimant's injuries.
Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.
3