Wood Vending, Inc. v. Daniel Harold Minesky ( 1995 )


Menu:
  •                     COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present:    Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
    WOOD VENDING, INC.
    AND
    PROVIDENCE WASHINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY
    MEMORANDUM OPINION *
    v.   Record No. 1237-95-1                         PER CURIAM
    NOVEMBER 28, 1995
    DANIEL HAROLD MINESKY
    FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
    (William C. Walker; Donna White Kearney; Bradford C.
    Jacob; Taylor & Walker, on briefs), for appellants.
    (Daniel H. Minesky, pro se, on brief).
    Wood Vending, Inc. and its insurer (hereinafter collectively
    referred to as "employer") contend that the Workers' Compensation
    Commission erred in (1) finding that Daniel Harold Minesky
    ("claimant") proved that he made a reasonable effort to market
    his residual work capacity after May 9, 1994; and (2) considering
    certain documents submitted by claimant as after-discovered
    evidence.   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.
    In order to establish entitlement to benefits, a partially
    disabled employee must prove that he has made a reasonable effort
    to procure suitable work but has been unable to do so.    Great
    *
    Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
    designated for publication.
    Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. v. Bateman, 
    4 Va. App. 459
    , 464, 
    359 S.E.2d 98
    , 101 (1987).   "What constitutes a reasonable marketing effort
    depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case."     The
    Greif Companies v. Sipe, 
    16 Va. App. 709
    , 715, 
    434 S.E.2d 314
    ,
    318 (1993).   We have discussed factors which the commission
    should consider in deciding whether a claimant has made
    reasonable good faith efforts to market his remaining capacity:
    (1) the nature and extent of employee's
    disability; (2) the employee's training, age,
    experience, and education; (3) the nature and
    extent of employee's job search; (4) the
    employee's intent in conducting his job
    search; (5) the availability of jobs in the
    area suitable for the employee, considering
    his disability; and (6) any other matter
    affecting employee's capacity to find
    suitable employment.
    National Linen Serv. v. McGuinn, 
    8 Va. App. 267
    , 272, 
    380 S.E.2d 31
    , 34 (1989) (footnotes omitted).   In reviewing the commission's
    findings, "we view the evidence in the light most favorable
    to . . . the party prevailing before the commission."     
    Id. at 270,
    380 S.E.2d at 33.   "However, where, as here, there is no
    conflict in the evidence as to the relevant factors, the question
    of sufficiency is one of law."   
    Sipe, 16 Va. App. at 716
    , 434
    S.E.2d at 318.
    In awarding temporary total disability benefits to Minesky,
    the commission found that Minesky made a reasonable effort to
    market his remaining capacity.   We cannot say that the commission
    erred as a matter of law in making this determination.    The
    evidence before the deputy commissioner and the full commission
    2
    showed that Minesky contacted at least thirty potential employers
    between May 19, 1994 and September 28, 1994.   He also registered
    with the Virginia Employment Commission ("VEC") and the West
    Virginia Employment Commission.   The commission reasonably
    inferred from Minesky's testimony that he satisfactorily
    documented potential employment contacts in order to continue to
    receive unemployment benefits in West Virginia. 1
    Taking into account this undisputed evidence, Minesky's
    ninth grade education, and his lifting restriction which
    precludes most employment as a welder or mechanic, we find
    sufficient credible evidence exists to support the commission's
    finding that Minesky made a reasonable effort to market his
    residual work capacity.
    For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
    Affirmed.
    1
    The commission did not indicate in its review opinion that
    it relied upon the VEC job contact forms, Minesky's
    correspondence with the Virginia Department of Labor and
    Industry, or Dr. Gold's November 7, 1994 work excuse to support
    its finding on the marketing issue. Accordingly, employer's
    second question presented is without merit.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1237951

Filed Date: 11/28/1995

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021