George B. Southern, Jr. v. Shirley Contracting,etc

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Annunziata, Agee and Senior Judge Coleman
GEORGE B. SOUTHERN, JR.
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. Record No. 0384-01-2 PER CURIAM
JULY 3, 2001
SHIRLEY CONTRACTING CORPORATION AND
CLARK CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC.
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Wesley G. Marshall, on brief), for
appellant.
(Alan D. Sundburg; Friedlander, Misler,
Sloan, Kletzkin & Ochsman, PLLC, on brief),
for appellees.
George B. Southern, Jr. (claimant) contends that the
Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that the
medical treatment rendered to him by Dr. David P. Sokolow was
unauthorized, and, therefore, not the responsibility of Shirley
Contracting Corporation and its insurer (hereinafter referred to
as "employer"). 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. See
Rule 5A:27.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
to the prevailing party below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v.
Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990).
The record established that Dr. Ramesh Chandra, an
orthopedist, has been claimant's treating physician since
September 10, 1999. Dr. Chandra performed arthroscopic surgery
on claimant's right knee on October 5, 1999. Thereafter,
Dr. Chandra noted "significant degenerative changes" in
claimant's right knee revealed by a repeat MRI. Dr. Chandra
suspected that claimant eventually would need joint replacement
surgery. By February 9, 2000, Dr. Chandra noted that his
treatment of claimant was complete and that any further
treatment "would be in the hands of a total joint replacement
surgeon."
Dr. Sokolow, who examined claimant upon the request of
claimant's attorney, recommended a total knee replacement.
Dr. Sokolow opined that the knee replacement was secondary to
the September 8, 1999 accident. Claimant did not seek
authorization from employer to see Dr. Sokolow nor did he
request that the commission grant him a change in treating
physicians.
Dr. Joseph Linehan, who examined claimant on April 26, 2000
at employer's request, opined that the total knee replacement
was due to degenerative arthritis rather than the compensable
- 2 -
September 8, 1999 accident. Dr. Chandra opined that he could
not causally relate claimant's need for total knee replacement
to the compensable September 8, 1999 accident in the absence of
any objective evidence that the accident aggravated or
accelerated claimant's long-standing degenerative arthritis.
In its January 18, 2001 opinion, the full commission
affirmed the deputy commissioner's finding that the total knee
replacement surgery recommended by Dr. Sokolow was not causally
related to claimant's compensable September 8, 1999 injury by
accident. Accordingly, the commission ruled that employer was
not responsible for the cost of Dr. Sokolow's treatment.
Claimant did not challenge these findings on appeal, and,
therefore, they are binding and conclusive upon this Court.
Rather, on appeal, claimant contends that because employer
denied his claim for ongoing medical benefits; Dr. Chandra
released claimant from his care; and the commission failed to
rule upon the issue of whether Dr. Sokolow's treatment was
authorized, he has been left without a treating physician. We
disagree.
Nothing in the record established that Dr. Chandra did not
continue to be claimant's treating physician for any causally
related medical treatment that claimant might need in the
future. In fact, the record showed that claimant continued to
receive medical treatment from Dr. Chandra through at least
- 3 -
February 2000. Because Dr. Sokolow's treatment was deemed
unrelated to the compensable accident and not employer's
responsibility, the commission was not required to rule that
Dr. Sokolow's treatment was authorized.
For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.
- 4 -