Tire Centers v. W. Va. Office of Insurance Commissioner/Earl Akers ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                              STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
    SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS                                FILED
    March 27, 2013
    RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
    TIRE CENTERS, INC.,                                                       SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
    OF WEST VIRGINIA
    Employer Below, Petitioner
    vs.)   No. 11-0958	 (BOR Appeal No. 2045296)
    (Claim No. 2010103209)
    WEST VIRGINIA OFFICE OF
    INSURANCE COMMISSIONER
    Commissioner Below, Respondent
    and
    EARL AKERS,
    Claimant Below, Respondent
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Petitioner Tire Centers, Inc., by Melissa Robinson, its attorney, appeals the decision of
    the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review.
    This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated June 10, 2011, in which
    the Board affirmed a November 5, 2010, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges.
    In its Order, the Office of Judges reversed the claims administrator’s September 14, 2009,
    decision and held the claim compensable for cervical strain, thoracic strain, lumbar strain, and
    meniscus tear of the left knee. The Court has carefully reviewed the records, written arguments,
    and appendices contained in the briefs, and the case is mature for consideration.
    This Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The facts and legal
    arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided
    by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record
    presented, the Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these
    reasons, a memorandum decision is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate
    Procedure.
    1
    Mr. Akers was injured on August 14, 2009, when he was involved in a vehicle accident
    while working for Tire Centers, Inc. According to statements by Tire Centers, Inc. drug tests
    administered after the accident were positive. The claims administrator on September 14, 2009,
    denied Mr. Akers’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits because the drug screening came
    back positive for non-prescribed medications.
    The Office of Judges reversed the claims administrator’s Order, and held that the record
    established that the claim should be held compensable for cervical strain, thoracic strain, lumbar
    strain, and meniscus tear of the left knee. On appeal, Tire Centers disputes this finding and
    argues that under West Virginia Code § 23-4-2(a) (2005), Mr. Akers is not entitled to receive
    workers’ compensation benefits because his injury was caused by his own intoxication.
    The Office of Judges stated specifically, “[t]he inference of the record is that a drug test
    was found positive for Oxycodone and Benzodiazepines. However, no drug test results were
    made part of the record.” Under Rule 6(b) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, “[a]nything not
    filed with the lower tribunal shall not be included in the record on appeal unless the Court grants
    a motion for leave to supplement the record on appeal for good cause shown.” The Office of
    Judges noted that the evidence is clear that Mr. Akers did sustain a work related injury on August
    14, 2009, due to a motor vehicle accident, and due to that injury he suffered the aforesaid
    compensable conditions. Again, no drug test results were made a part of the record to the Office
    of Judges. It concluded that the record and facts demonstrate that Mr. Akers’s claim for workers’
    compensation benefits should be compensable. The Board of Review reached the same reasoned
    conclusions in its decision of June 10, 2011.
    For the foregoing reasons, we find that the decision of the Board of Review is not in clear
    violation of any constitutional or statutory provision, nor is it clearly the result of erroneous
    conclusions of law, nor is it based upon a material misstatement or mischaracterization of the
    evidentiary record. Therefore, the decision of the Board of Review is affirmed.
    Affirmed.
    ISSUED: March 27, 2013
    CONCURRED IN BY:
    Chief Justice Brent D. Benjamin
    Justice Robin J. Davis
    Justice Margaret L. Workman
    Justice Menis E. Ketchum
    Justice Allen H. Loughry II
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-0958

Filed Date: 3/27/2013

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014