COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
C. W. WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
AND
INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA MEMORANDUM OPINION *
PER CURIAM
v. Record No. 2301-96-3 MARCH 4, 1997
DAVID EDWARD CARTER
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(A. James Kauffman; Eric J. Remington;
Taylor, Hazen & Kauffman, on brief), for
appellants.
(Russell W. Updike; Wilson & Updike, on
brief), for appellee.
C. W. Wright Construction Company, Inc. and its insurer
(hereinafter collectively referred to as "employer") contend that
the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that (1)
David Edward Carter (claimant) proved that the aggravation of his
preexisting left knee condition was a compensable consequence of
his December 1992 right knee injury; and (2) the Supreme Court's
holding in Stenrich Group v. Jemmott, 251 Va. 186, 467 S.E.2d 795
(1996), was not applicable to this case. Upon reviewing the
record and the briefs of the parties, we find that this appeal is
without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's
decision. Rule 5A:27.
On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
to the prevailing party below. R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v.
Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). "The
actual determination of causation is a factual finding that will
not be disturbed on appeal if there is credible evidence to
support the finding." Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Musick, 7 Va. App.
684, 688, 376 S.E.2d 814, 817 (1989).
The evidence established that on June 17, 1991, claimant
sustained a compensable back injury. In December 1992, during
rehabilitation for the back injury, claimant fell and sustained a
compensable right knee injury, which resulted in surgery to his
right knee. Due to claimant's right knee symptoms, he shifted
his weight and altered his gait, causing a strain on his left
knee. Claimant had sustained a football injury to his left knee
in 1977, which resulted in surgery and some residual impairment.
Beginning in April 1993, claimant complained of left knee pain
to his physicians. Ultimately, claimant's physicians recommended
surgery for claimant's left knee and opined that the left knee
condition resulted from an aggravation of claimant's preexisting
left knee problems due to the transfer of weight to the left knee
as a result of the right knee injury.
In distinguishing Stenrich and in holding employer
responsible for the cost of medical treatment for claimant's left
knee condition, the commission found as follows:
In Stenrich, the Court was considering
the claimant's burden in establishing an
injury by accident. Here, the injury by
accident has been established, and we are
considering the compensable consequences of
2
that injury. In this case, the claimant need
only show a causal connection between the
compensable injury and a condition which
flowed naturally from that injury.
The issue presented in this case is
essentially a medical one. The medical
evidence is not in conflict. The three
physicians who have attended the claimant for
the left knee condition, all agree that the
condition flowed as a natural consequence
from the compensable right knee injury.
The uncontradicted medical records and testimony of Drs.
Marilyn K. Glaser, Ian D. Archibald, and Susan T. Bertrand
provide ample credible evidence to support the commission's
finding that claimant's compensable right knee injury caused a
material aggravation of his preexisting left knee condition,
resulting in the necessity of left knee surgery. The doctrine of
compensable consequences provides that, "'[w]hen the primary
injury is shown to have arisen out of and in the course of
employment, every natural consequence that flows from the injury
likewise arises out of the employment, unless it is the result of
an independent intervening cause attributable to claimant's own
intentional conduct.'" Morris v. Badger Powhatan/Figgie Int'l,
Inc., 3 Va. App. 276, 283, 348 S.E.2d 876, 879 (1986) (citation
omitted). Because credible evidence supports the commission's
findings, they are binding upon us on appeal. These findings
support the application of the doctrine of compensable
consequences in this case.
In addition, the rule set forth in Stenrich was not
applicable to this case. Claimant had already proven a
3
compensable injury by accident to his right knee. Therefore, the
commission did not err in refusing to apply Stenrich.
For the reasons stated, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.
4