COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Willis and Bumgardner
Argued at Salem, Virginia
PITT DES MOINES, INC. AND
EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 0974-98-3 JUDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER, III
JANUARY 26, 1999
RANDY W. BUSBEE
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
Stephen A. Strickler (Matthew H. Kraft;
McCardell & Inman, P.L.C., on brief), for
appellants.
Linda D. Slough (Chandler, Franklin &
O'Bryan, on brief), for appellee.
Pitt Des Moines, Inc. appeals a decision of the Workers'
Compensation Commission that awarded the claimant benefits for
injuries received when he fell at work. Pitt Des Moines argues
that the commission erred when it held that the claimant suffered
low back injuries caused by the fall. Concluding that the record
contains credible medical evidence that supports the award, we
affirm the commission's decision.
The standard of our review of the commission's findings of
fact is well established.
We do not retry the facts before the
Commission nor do we review the weight,
preponderance of the evidence, or the
credibility of witnesses. If there is
evidence or reasonable inference that can be
drawn from the evidence to support the
Commission's findings, they will not be
*
Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code § 17-116.010,
this opinion is not designated for publication.
disturbed by this Court on appeal, even
though there is evidence in the record to
support contrary findings of fact.
Caskey v. Dan River Mills, Inc., 225 Va. 405, 411, 302 S.E.2d
507, 510-11 (1983) (citations omitted).
The claimant, Randy Busbee, fell off a ladder on December 9,
1996, while working as a welder building a water tower. He fell
a distance, variously described as from five to twenty feet, onto
a rock floor and landed on his back and neck. Though at first he
did not feel that he was injured, shortly afterwards he told his
supervisor that he was hurt and went to get medical attention.
Dr. Arbabi at Express Care referred him to a neurologist, Dr.
Jonathan R. Amy, who released Busbee to light duty work. Busbee
returned to light duty, but received permission to leave the job
two days before the project ended so that he could go to his home
in Florida. He planned to return to work on January 7, 1997, at
the employer's next project where light duty work was available.
When Busbee returned from Florida, he got permission to see
Dr. Ethan O. Todd. Dr. Todd saw him on January 7, 1997 and took
him off work. Busbee reported this to Pitt Des Moines, and its
insurer requested that Busbee see a physical medicine and
rehabilitation specialist, Dr. Howard B. Weiss. Busbee saw him
January 23, 1997.
On January 13, 1997, Busbee was videotaped while he worked
for a concrete company. The video shows him without apparent
difficulty stooping, bending, shoveling, lifting, and carrying
- 2 -
materials including boards about eight feet long.
After carefully reviewing the medical record, the deputy
commissioner concluded that Busbee suffered a compensable injury
to his back, right leg, right shoulder, right arm and neck on
December 9, 1996. The deputy commissioner awarded benefits from
December 9 through December 11, 1996, and January 7 through
January 12, 1997, and awarded medical benefits for as long as
necessary. Pitt Des Moines appealed claiming Busbee did not
suffer an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of
his employment, did not suffer any disability, did not suffer any
low back injury, and the deputy commissioner incorrectly
calculated weekly wages. The full commission affirmed the award
modifying only the average weekly wage.
On this appeal, Pitt Des Moines limits its argument to the
complaints of low back injury. It argues that the record is
insufficient to establish an injury to the low back by accident
or to establish a causal relation between any low back injury and
the accident. Pitt Des Moines argues that the commission erred
in failing to address all relevant and material evidence. We
disagree and conclude that credible medical evidence supports the
commission's findings that Busbee suffered a lower back injury
that was causally related to his industrial accident on December
9, 1996.
Dr. Arbabi saw Busbee at Express Care on December 9, 1996.
He complained of right arm and leg numbness, with upper back and
- 3 -
neck pain, and a burning feeling between his shoulders. On
December 11, 1996, Busbee complained to Dr. Amy of pain in the
shoulder and right neck area with a burning pain on the right
side of the cervical spine. The doctor noted some pain in the
medial aspect of the right elbow and tingling in two fingers of
the right hand. On December 17, Busbee reported to Dr. Amy
continued neck and arm pain that was sometimes worse than
previously reported.
Dr. Todd first saw Busbee on January 7, 1997 when Busbee
complained of tingling fingers, occasional low back pain, and
pain radiating in the right thigh. That was the first specific
reference in the doctors' records to lower back problems.
Busbee's most consistent complaints were pain in the upper back,
primarily on the right side. On January 14, 1997, Busbee
complained to Dr. Todd of an episode of sudden pain to the right
arm and leg that caused him to fall. Dr. Todd's physical
findings that day did not differ from his previous examination.
On January 28, 1997, he noted the claimant had limited motion in
his neck and low back.
Dr. Weiss saw Busbee on January 23, 1997. He noted that
Busbee's primary complaint was low back and neck pain, right
trapezial pain, and right leg and right arm pain. On examination
Busbee moved without difficulty. Busbee said that activity
produced back pain and that leg and back pain limited walking.
Dr. Weiss diagnosed cervical trapezial sprain and lumbosacral
- 4 -
sprain that he believed were causally related to the December 9,
1996 injury.
Dr. Todd saw the videotape of Busbee working at the concrete
company on January 13, 1997, and he was questioned whether it
changed his opinion. Dr. Todd acknowledged that Busbee's
subjective complaints made the day after the videotape were
inconsistent with what Todd observed on the videotape. Dr. Todd
did not find Busbee's complaints to be exaggerated and
acknowledged that they were consistent as to location and degree
of pain. He also believed that Busbee's work on January 13
aggravated his condition, and the examination on January 14, 1997
reflected that. Based on the tape, Dr. Todd would not restrict
Busbee's bending, lifting, or climbing.
After watching the videotape, Dr. Weiss said he would have
placed no restrictions on Busbee. While he acknowledged that he
made his observations based on Busbee's subjective complaints,
Dr. Weiss saw no indications that Busbee exaggerated his
complaints. Dr. Weiss stated that he had no way of knowing
whether the work Busbee performed on January 13 affected his
examination on January 14.
"[T]he commission must review all relevant evidence having a
bearing on a case and cannot comply with the Act where the record
is incomplete . . . ." Dynalectric Co. v. Ellis, 19 Va. App.
541, 547, 452 S.E.2d 372, 376 (1995). The commission is required
to base its findings of fact on credible evidence, but not to
- 5 -
recite all of the evidence in its opinion. See id. at 546, 452
S.E.2d at 375; Code § 65.2-705. In Dynalectric, the employer
appealed a commission's decision, which noted that "'[n]o useful
purpose would be served by our review of the extensive record'"
which consisted of two thousand pages of medical evidence. Id.
at 546, 452 S.E.2d at 375. As in Dynalectric, "no evidence is
missing from the record, nor is there any indication that the
commission refused to review any relevant evidence brought to its
attention." Id. at 547, 452 S.E.2d at 376. Cf. Flavin v. J.C.
Penney Co., Inc., 1 Va. App. 1, 332 S.E.2d 805 (1985) (commission
erred when it refused to review relevant evidence).
Contrary to Pitt Des Moines’s assertion, the commission’s
decision reflects consideration of the entire record, and it
specifically incorporates the deputy's findings into its opinion.
On December 9, 1996, Busbee complained of upper back pain with a
burning feeling between the shoulders to Dr. Arbabi. On December
11, 1996, he complained of burning pain on the right side of the
cervical spine to Dr. Amy. On January 7, 1997, Dr. Todd noted
that Busbee complained of occasional low back pain and more
consistent pain in the upper back. Busbee's primary complaint on
January 23, 1997 to Dr. Weiss was low back and neck pain. We
conclude that there is evidence in the record that Busbee
suffered injury to his back including his lower back.
Pitt Des Moines asserts that even if there was evidence of
low back pain, the record is devoid of evidence establishing a
- 6 -
causal relationship between the fall and such problems. Dr. Todd
testified that Busbee's complaints were consistent as to location
and severity and that he did not exaggerate. Dr. Weiss also
testified that Busbee's primary complaint was pain in his lower
back and neck. Drs. Arbabi and Amy both noted Busbee's complaint
of pain between the shoulders and on the right side of the
cervical spine respectively. Both observations relate to
reported complaints of back pain in December 1996. "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." Wagner Enters., Inc. v. Brooks, 12 Va.
App. 890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1991) (citation omitted). See
McPeek v. P.W. & W. Coal Co., Inc., 210 Va. 185, 188, 169 S.E.2d
443, 445 (1969).
Pitt Des Moines stresses the value of the evidence recorded
on the videotape which shows the claimant doing physical labor.
Pitt Des Moines argues that the video evidence destroys the
validity of the doctors' opinions made after Busbee returned from
Florida. It argues that the commission should only look at the
emergency room doctor's findings and the opinions made before
January 7, 1997. When so limited, no evidence shows that Busbee
suffered an injury to his lower back because the videotape
renders the claimant's subjective complaints unbelievable.
It is true that a doctor's opinion based on a faulty premise
is not entitled to weight when resolving conflicting evidence.
- 7 -
See Clinchfield Coal Co. v. Bowman, 229 Va. 249, 252, 329 S.E.2d
15, 16 (1985). However, the evidence in the videotape does not
undermine all evidence supporting the claimant's proof of injury.
He did fall and did suffer compensable injuries. The tape does
establish that the claimant was not limited after January 13,
1997, and the commission ruled that the tape rebutted any claim
of injury after that date. However, that does not conclusively
rebut the claim of injury before that date. The commission must
evaluate conflicting evidence and determine the inferences to
draw from it. The record shows that the commission evaluated all
the evidence including the videotape and the doctors' testimony
after they saw it. Determining whether Busbee suffered an injury
is a finding of fact that will not be disturbed on appeal.
For these reasons, we conclude that the evidence supports
the commission's finding that Busbee injured his lower back on
December 9, 1996. We affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.
- 8 -