Inova Loudoun Hospital and Inova Health Systems v. Najat Chemlali Goode ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                              COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present: Judges Alston, Decker and Senior Judge Frank
    UNPUBLISHED
    INOVA LOUDOUN HOSPITAL AND
    INOVA HEALTH SYSTEMS
    MEMORANDUM OPINION*
    v.     Record No. 1612-14-4                                         PER CURIAM
    MARCH 17, 2015
    NAJAT CHEMLALI GOODE
    FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION
    (Joshua M. Wulf; David A. Obuchowicz; Midkiff, Muncie & Ross,
    P.C., on brief), for appellants.
    (David B. Vermont; Ashcraft & Gerel, LLP, on brief), for appellee.
    Inova Loudoun Hospital (employer) appeals from an August 4, 2014 order of the
    Workers’ Compensation Commission affirming a deputy commissioner’s opinion finding that
    Najat Chemlali Goode (claimant) proved injuries by accident to her neck and upper back, that
    her medical treatment and disability were causally related to the accident, and that she had
    ongoing partial work incapacity related to the accident. On appeal, employer contends the
    commission erred by (1) finding “claimant injured her neck and upper back in the February 26,
    2013 accident,” (2) finding “claimant’s medical treatment from March 12, 2013 and thereafter
    was causally related to the February 26, 2013 accident,” and (3) “presum[ing] that the claimant
    remained partially disabled after January 28, 2014 . . . .”
    Upon reviewing the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that this appeal is without
    merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission’s decision. Rule 5A:27. We affirm
    for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Goode v. Inova Loudoun
    *
    Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
    Hosp., JCN VA00000748079 (Aug. 4, 2014). 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-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1612144

Filed Date: 3/17/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021