Opinion
Record No. 1403-92-3
December 22, 1992
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION.
(Donald E. Earls, on brief), for appellant.
(Sandra B. Riggs, Assistant Attorney General; Zane B. Scott, Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.
Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis.
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated publication.
Lewis Franklin Wheatley contends that the commission erred in failing to find that he sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Worker's Compensation Commission. Rule 5A:27.
On appellate review, we will 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). When the evidence is so viewed, it proved that beginning in 1988, Wheatley and a co-worker, Robinette, began to develop an interpersonal conflict that affected their working relationship. The record reveals that the relationship between Wheatley and Robinette continued to deteriorate and that their differences could not be resolved. Robinette and Wheatley had a significant disagreement in March, 1991, when Wheatley was assigned to investigate a multiple fatality mining explosion. The conflict progressed to the point that on February 28, 1991, Wheatley considered inflicting bodily harm on Robinette, but refrained from doing so.
Changes in Wheatley's emotional state began to be manifest in the summer of 1990. Wheatley stated that during this time period his job as Deputy Director of the Division of Mines became more stressful due to absent inspectors, an increased workload, and labor related strike activity at several mines. In addition, his secretary of ten years was awarded another job. Wheatley testified that, beginning in August, 1990, his personal life began to fall apart. He testified that he became withdrawn and did not want to do anything or go anywhere. He also began to experience some physical problems. Wheatley sought psychiatric treatment beginning on March 5, 1991.
The commission found that the evidence proved neither an injury by accident nor an occupational disease. In this appeal, Wheatley does not raise any issue with respect to occupational disease. Wheatley contends only that his confrontation with Robinette on February 28, 1991, was "the incident which manifested itself in severe depression requiring . . . Wheatley to leave his employment." However, the commission specifically found "no evidence . . . that [Wheatley's] altercation or encounter with Robinette on February 28, 1991, resulted in any disabling physical injuries." "Decisions by the commission as to questions of fact, if supported by credible evidence, are conclusive and binding on this Court." Manassas Ice and Fuel Co. v. Farrar, 13 Va. App. 227, 229, 409 S.E.2d 824, 826 (1991).
Wheatley's testimony describes a continuing personality conflict over a lengthy period of time with Robinette. He described a disagreement with Robinette at work on February 28, 1991, and related the following incident that occurred that same day at a garage:
I pulled up to the gas pumps and started putting gas in my vehicle. And I turned around and he was standing — he was walking towards me, and he started off in his normal tone of cursing, and he wanted to tell me real quick that if I was trying to embarrass him that morning that I was the one that got embarrassed, that he had friends in Kentucky and he had friends in Virginia, and blah, blah, blah. And I — Like I say, I just don't know what happened to me, but at that point in time I just started reaching in my pocket. I was trying to find something, because I was going to pour the gas on him and burn him into hell, and that's what was going through my mind. I mean, I just — I just had all I could take. And I just went all to pieces. And then I proceeded to tell him what a son of a bitch he was.
In Burlington Mills Corp. v. Hagood, 177 Va. 204, 209-10, 13 S.E.2d 291, 293 (1941), the Supreme Court held "that there is an accidental . . . injury within the workmen's compensation acts where an employee, in the course of his employment, receives a sudden shock or fright, involving no physical impact, which results in his disability." The commission found that "none of the medical reports suggest that [Wheatley's] encounter with Robinette was the cause of his current disability." The credible evidence in the record supports that finding.
The medical records from the Veterans Administration Hospital suggest that Wheatley's current emotional problems may be related to his Vietnam combat experience in the 1960's. The record reflects that Wheatley was wounded several times and suffered post-traumatic stress after being discharged from the military. Dr. David E. Ramsey, Jr., Wheatley's treating psychiatrist since March 5, 1991, opined, however, that Wheatley's depression is due solely to the tremendous stress placed on him by his employment. Dr. Ramsey noted on his intake history that the stress symptoms related to Wheatley's employment had existed for at least two years. Moreover, in March, 1991, Wheatley told Dr. Ramsey that he had realized he needed help for a long time, but had been too proud to seek it.
None of Wheatley's medical records suggest that his psychiatric condition is the result of any one specific incident. The evidence in the record supports the commission's finding that substantial evidence proved that it is just as probable that Wheatley's disability resulted from his military experiences as it is probable that the disability arose from gradual stress of employment. Thus, the commission did not err in holding that Wheatley did not meet his burden of proof. See Bergmann v. LW Drywall, 222 Va. 30, 32, 278 S.E.2d 801, 802 (1981).
For the reasons stated, the commission's decision is affirmed.
Affirmed.