Murray Electrical v. Patricia Ann Crawford

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis
MURRAY ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS
AND
TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY MEMORANDUM OPINION *
OF ILLINOIS PER CURIAM
JANUARY 7, 1997
v. Record No. 1860-96-3
PATRICIA ANN CRAWFORD
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(William Orr Smith, on briefs), for
appellants.
(Roger A. Ritchie; Roger A. Ritchie &
Partners, P.L.C., on brief), for appellee.
Murray Electrical Products and its insurer contend that the
Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that Patricia
Ann Crawford proved she sustained an injury by accident arising
out of and in the course of her employment on November 23, 1994.
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 rendering its decision, the commission found as follows:
At the hearing on July 13, 1995, the
claimant clearly described the sudden onset
of pain as she sat down at her workstation
after returning with a pan of hubs which she
had just removed from a barrel. The onset of
pain was sudden and commenced almost
immediately upon her removal of the hubs from
the barrel, which was necessary to tip in
order to "rake" them out. The weight of the
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
pan of hubs was reported to Dr. Brothers as
being some 30 to 40 pounds. The injury
itself is documented by the medical evidence.
"In order to carry [the] burden of proving an 'injury by
accident,' a claimant must prove that the cause of [the] injury
was an identifiable incident or sudden precipitating event and
that it resulted in an obvious sudden mechanical or structural
change in the body." Morris v. Morris, 238 Va. 578, 589, 385
S.E.2d 858, 865 (1989). Crawford's testimony provides credible
evidence to support the commission's finding that she proved an
identifiable incident resulting in a sudden mechanical change in
her body. Thus, that finding is conclusive on this appeal.
James v. Capitol Steel Constr. Co., 8 Va. App. 512, 515, 382
S.E.2d 487, 488 (1989).
In rendering its decision, the commission considered the
various medical histories and Crawford's recorded statement, and
the commission resolved any inconsistencies in this evidence in
favor of Crawford. "In determining whether credible evidence
exists, the appellate court does not retry the facts, reweigh the
preponderance of the evidence, or make its own determination of
the credibility of the witnesses." Wagner Enters., Inc. v.
Brooks, 12 Va. App. 890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1991). "The
fact that there is contrary evidence in the record is of no
consequence if there is credible evidence to support the
commission's finding." Id.
For the reasons stated, we affirm the commission's decision.
2
Affirmed.
3