Michael Anthony Norman v. Delmarva Sash & Door, etc ( 2002 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Willis, Frank and Clements
MICHAEL ANTHONY NORMAN
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. Record No. 3361-01-2 PER CURIAM
JUNE 25, 2002
DELMARVA SASH & DOOR AND
ASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Michael A. Norman, pro se, on brief).
No brief for appellees.
Michael Anthony Norman contends the Workers' Compensation
Commission erred in refusing to consider the claim he filed with
the commission on August 13, 2001, alleging he sustained an
injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his
employment on April 6, 1992. 1 Upon reviewing the record and
opening brief, we conclude that this appeal is without merit.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
1
We note that the August 13, 2001 claim recited an accident
date of April 6, 1992. However, it is clear from the record and
the description of the alleged accident that claimant was
referring to the April 3, 1992 accident, which was the subject
of his previously-litigated claim filed on October 22, 1992. We
also note that in his opening brief, claimant presented argument
relative to the merits of his underlying claim for the April
1992 injury by accident. However, because we dispose of this
appeal on res judicata grounds, we need not address that
argument.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's decision.
Rule 5A:27.
The record established that on October 4, 1993, on review,
the commission affirmed the March 25, 1993 opinion of the deputy
commissioner, denying claimant's claim on the ground that he
failed to prove he sustained an injury by accident arising out
of and in the course of his employment on April 3, 1992. On
January 31, 1994, this Court dismissed an appeal of that
decision. Norman v. Delmarva Sash & Door, Record No. 2207-93-2.
On August 13, 2001, claimant filed another claim for the same
accident with the commission. The commission ruled that the
August 13, 2001 claim was barred by the doctrine of res
judicata. We agree.
Res judicata applies "where there is a valid, personal
judgment obtained by a defendant on the merits of an action.
The judgment bars relitigation of the same cause of action, or
any part thereof which could have been litigated between the
same parties and their privies." K & L Trucking Co. v. Thurber,
1 Va. App. 213, 219, 337 S.E.2d 299, 302 (1985).
A valid final judgment existed prior to the filing of the
August 13, 2001 claim, finding that claimant failed to prove he
sustained a compensable injury by accident arising out of and in
the course of his employment on April 3, 1992. Thus, the
commission did not err in ruling that claimant could not seek to
relitigate that same issue. Accordingly, the commission
- 2 -
properly dismissed claimant's August 13, 2001 claim as barred by
the doctrine of res judicata.
For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.
- 3 -