Staunton Correctional Center, CW v. Gary Sanderson ( 2001 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judge Bumgardner and
Senior Judge Hodges
STAUNTON CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. Record No. 0114-01-3 PER CURIAM
MAY 15, 2001
GARY L. SANDERSON
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Mark L. Earley, Attorney General; Judith
Williams Jagdmann, Deputy Attorney General;
Gregory E. Lucyk, Senior Assistant Attorney
General; Donald G. Powers, Assistant Attorney
General, on brief), for appellant.
(George L. Townsend; Brian J. McNamara;
Chandler, Franklin & O'Bryan, on brief), for
appellee.
Staunton Correctional Center, Commonwealth of Virginia
(employer), contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission
erred in finding that Gary L. Sanderson (claimant) proved that
he sustained an injury by accident arising out of his employment
on July 29, 1999. 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. See
Rule 5A:27.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
On appeal, we are bound by the factual findings of the
commission if they are supported by credible evidence in the
record. See Crisp v. Brown's Tysons Corner Dodge, Inc., 1 Va.
App. 503, 504, 339 S.E.2d 916, 916 (1986). However, "[w]hether
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). "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. 199, 202, 455 S.E.2d 761,
763 (1995).
Claimant testified that on July 29, 1999, while descending
stairs at work, his left foot slipped forward, causing injury to
his left knee. He stated that there was a wet substance on the
step upon which he placed his left foot at the time of the
incident.
Claimant testified that he reported the injury to Carolyn
Maclam, a nurse in employer's medical unit. Maclam treated
claimant in her capacity as a nurse. She testified that she was
more interested in the injury itself rather than how it happened
when she questioned claimant. She could not recall asking
claimant what caused the injury, and she did not recall claimant
mentioning a foreign substance.
- 2 -
In an accident report completed by claimant for Maclam,
claimant wrote that he was "leaving office in Bldg. 37-3 coming
down stair when a sharp pain went down side of my knee and then
my knee tried to lock up." Claimant testified that he did not
provide specific details about the incident because he was not
asked.
Claimant explained that he did not initially report the
presence of a foreign substance because he was told to
immediately seek medical attention. He was in pain at the time,
and he was not focused on the details of the accident.
Claimant testified that he told Paul Lightner, his
supervisor, of the accident on the evening of July 29, 1999.
Claimant testified that he told Lightner that he was descending
the stairs, noticed a pain in his right leg, and then his left
knee locked up, causing him to grab the railing. Claimant
stated that he believed he told Lightner that there was
"something wet" on the step.
Lightner, who completed the Employer's First Report of
Accident, testified that he did so based upon information
provided by claimant. The report does not mention that there
was a foreign substance on the step. Lightner could not recall
his specific conversations with claimant. In addition, the
report was completed sometime after July 29, 1999, based upon
Lightner's notes of his conversation with claimant.
- 3 -
Claimant was initially treated by Dr. Richardson on
July 29, 1999. Dr. Richardson recorded a history of claimant
twisting his knee at work earlier that day. He diagnosed a left
knee strain. On August 5, 1999, Dr. Richardson opined that
"stairs may have aggravated & continue to aggravate L knee."
Claimant testified that he believed that he told Dr. Richardson
of the "wet substance" on the step.
On August 6, 1999, Dr. Lee Hereford examined claimant.
Dr. Hereford recorded a history that claimant "was walking down
some steps when the left knee gave way." Dr. Hereford diagnosed
possible left knee internal derangement related to possible
meniscal degeneration.
The commission found that claimant proved that his injury
was caused by a wet substance on the step and, therefore, arose
out of his employment. In so ruling, the commission weighed the
evidence and concluded that claimant's testimony was credible.
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).
Claimant's testimony provides credible evidence to support
the commission's factual findings. Based upon those findings,
the commission could reasonably conclude that the wet substance
on the stairs caused claimant to slip, resulting in his left
knee injury. The commission, as fact finder, was entitled to
weigh the medical evidence and to conclude that the histories
- 4 -
contained in the office notes of Drs. Richardson and Hereford
were of little probative value in light of the "sparse
documentation" provided by those physicians.
Claimant's testimony supported the conclusion that a
condition of the workplace either caused or contributed to his
left knee injury. Accordingly, we affirm the commission's
decision.
Affirmed.
- 5 -