From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stoots v. Boart Longyear Company

Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jan 11, 2011
Record No. 1699-10-3 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 11, 2011)

Opinion

Record No. 1699-10-3.

January 11, 2011.

Appeal from the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission.

(Ginger J. Largen; J.D. Morefield; Morefield Largen, on brief), for appellant.

(Kevin W. Cloe; Angela F. Gibbs; Midkiff, Muncie Ross, P.C., on brief), for appellees.

Present: Judges McClanahan, Haley and Senior Judge Willis.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.


Claude W. Stoots appeals a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission finding that Stoots did not adequately market his residual work capacity. We have reviewed the record and the commission's opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Stoots v. Boart Longyear Co., VWC File No. 232-80-81 (July 8, 2010). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Stoots v. Boart Longyear Company

Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jan 11, 2011
Record No. 1699-10-3 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 11, 2011)
Case details for

Stoots v. Boart Longyear Company

Case Details

Full title:CLAUDE WESLY STOOTS v. BOART LONGYEAR COMPANY AND ZURICH AMERICAN…

Court:Court of Appeals of Virginia

Date published: Jan 11, 2011

Citations

Record No. 1699-10-3 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 11, 2011)