Opinion
Record No. 0773-94-1
Decided: October 4, 1994
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
Affirmed.
(Karen M. Rye, on brief), for appellant.
(William W. Nexsen; Timothy P. Murphy; Stackhouse, Smith Nexsen, on brief), for appellees.
Present: Judges Barrow, Koontz and Bray
Pursuant to Code Sec. 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.
Lula B. Bradley contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that she failed to prove that her alleged back, neck, shoulder, and arm injuries, and resulting disability, were caused by her August 3, 1992 industrial accident. 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.
On appellate review, we must construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the party prevailing below. R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). "In order to carry [her] burden of proving an 'injury by accident,' a claimant must prove that the cause of [her] injury was an identifiable incident or sudden precipitating event and that it resulted in an obvious sudden mechanical change in the body." Morris v. Morris, 238 Va. 578, 589, 385 S.E.2d 858, 865 (1989). Unless we can say as a matter of law that Bradley's evidence sustained her burden of proving causation, the commission's findings are binding and conclusive upon us. Tomko v. Michael's Plastering Co., 210 Va. 697, 699, 173 S.E.2d 833, 835 (1970).
Bradley, a restaurant worker, testified that she injured her right shoulder, arm, neck, and back when she attempted to close a bun warmer door while at work on August 3, 1992. The door would not move, so she struck it with the palm of her right hand. She immediately felt a slight stinging in her right hand and arm. The symptoms increased during the remainder of her shift to include her right shoulder, side, and back.
Bradley first sought medical care on August 4, 1992 at NavCare. The August 4, 1992 NavCare report reflects a history of left sided neck pain and right shoulder pain of a one week duration. Bradley denied any specific injury; however, she mentioned that she worked at a fast food restaurant and was required to lift heavy items. She was diagnosed as suffering from fibrositis, tendinitis, and bursitis. The NavCare medical records through August 15, 1992 note a history of onset of pain associated with heavy lifting. These medical records do not support a causal connection between the August 3, 1992 bun warmer incident and Bradley's alleged neck, back, shoulder, and arm injuries. At most, these records demonstrate that Bradley's injuries were caused by non-compensable repetitive lifting activities carried out at work over an extended period of time.
On October 16, 1992, Dr. Glenn Nichols, the treating orthopedist, noted that, after the bun warmer incident Bradley felt some tingling in her right hand, but that it was not until after she performed repetitive slicing activities that she felt pain in her neck and right trapezial area. Dr. Nichols rendered no opinion regarding causation at that time. Dr. Nichols examined Bradley on October 21, 1992, October 30, 1992, and November 18, 1992. His office notes for those dates provide no opinion regarding causation. On February 25, 1993, in a letter to Bradley's counsel, Dr. Nichols stated that Bradley "injured her right hand and arm by repetitively banging it on a door which was stuck, and then suffered over-use injury to the shoulder girdle musculature and trapezii doing repetitive lifting and slicing activities." Dr. Nichols does not specifically state that Bradley's alleged shoulder, neck, back, and arm injuries were caused by the August 3, 1992 bun warmer incident. It was reasonable for the commission to infer from his letter that Dr. Nichols attributes Bradley's injuries to repetitive activities at work, which are not compensable under the Act. Dr. Richard T. Holden, who performed an independent medical examination of Bradley on October 29, 1992, provided no opinion regarding causation and found no physical findings to suggest any severe pain.
Based upon this record, we cannot say as a matter of law that the commission erred in finding that the medical evidence was not sufficient to establish a causal connection between Bradley's alleged injuries and the August 3, 1992 bun warmer incident. Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.