COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bumgardner, Humphreys and Senior Judge Hodges
AT&T CORPORATION
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. Record No. 2457-01-4 PER CURIAM
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
ROBIN ROXANNE VANSKIVER
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Thomas E. Dempsey; Joseph F. Giordano;
Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, P.C., on briefs), for
appellant.
(William S. Sands, Jr.; Duncan and Hopkins,
P.C., on brief), for appellee.
AT&T Corporation (employer) contends the Workers'
Compensation Commission erred in finding Robin Roxanne Vanskiver
(claimant) proved that (1) her disability from May 18, 2000
through June 18, 2000 was causally related to her compensable
bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome; and (2) her massage therapy
was necessary and causally related to her compensable bilateral
carpal tunnel syndrome. Upon reviewing the record and the
parties' briefs, we conclude that this appeal is without merit.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's decision.
Rule 5A:27.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
I.
On appeal, employer contends claimant's evidence failed to
prove that her disability from May 18, 2000 through June 18,
2000 was causally related to her compensable bilateral carpal
tunnel syndrome. However, employer did not contest this issue
before the commission. On review, the full commission
specifically noted employer stipulated that claimant's
disability, if any, was causally related to her compensable
disease. Accordingly, we will not consider this issue for the
first time on appeal. See Rule 5A:18.
II.
On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
to the prevailing party below. R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v.
Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990).
Factual findings made by the commission will be upheld on appeal
if supported by credible evidence. See James v. Capitol Steel
Constr. Co., 8 Va. App. 512, 515, 382 S.E.2d 487, 488 (1989).
The commission held that the medical record sufficiently
established that massage therapy was reasonable and necessary to
maintain claimant's ability to work and function. In so ruling,
the commission found as follows:
Dr. [Margit L.] Bleeker has continuously
recommended massage therapy as a method to
maintain the claimant's ability to function
and to control her ongoing symptoms. On
March 4, 1999, Dr. Bleeker confirmed that
massage therapy was medically necessary and
- 2 -
causally related to the occupational
disease. In November 2000, she reiterated
that the claimant's myofascial pain syndrome
resulted from bilateral carpal tunnel and
cubital tunnel releases and that she
required continuous treatment. The Deputy
Commissioner accorded more weight to the
treating physician's opinion, and the record
is insufficient to reverse this
determination. We disagree with the
employer's assertions that the claimant has
received extensive palliative care with no
change in her condition, and that since she
has reached MMI, massage therapy has little
value. As stated, the treating physician
has continued to prescribe a certain
modality of treatment and to emphasize its
benefits and necessity. Dr. Bleeker's notes
reveal objective physical findings and that
the claimant suffers from pain which
fluctuates with her activities. In fact,
Dr. [Michael] Shear noted that ceasing
massage therapy would increase the
claimant's symptoms.
Claimant's testimony and Dr. Bleeker's medical records and
opinions constitute credible evidence to support the
commission's findings. As fact finder, the commission was
entitled to give more probative weight to the opinion of the
treating neurologist, Dr. Bleeker, regarding the reasonableness,
necessity, and causation of the massage therapy, than to the
contrary opinion of Dr. Shear, who examined claimant on one
occasion at employer's request. "Questions raised by
conflicting medical opinions must be decided by the commission."
Penley v. Island Creek Coal Co., 8 Va. App. 310, 318, 381 S.E.2d
231, 236 (1989).
- 3 -
Because credible evidence supports the commission's finding
that the massage therapy was reasonable, necessary, and causally
related to claimant's compensable occupational disease, we will
not disturb it on appeal.
For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.
- 4 -