Opinion
Record No. 2104-09-2.
January 19, 2010.
Appeal from the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission.
(Matthew L. Wooten, pro se, on briefs).
(Jeffrey W. Saunders; Dannielle C. Hall-McIvor; Taylor Walker, P.C., on brief), for appellees.
Present: Judges Frank, Alston and Senior Judge Coleman.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
Matthew L. Wooten (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission finding that (1) his claim for treatment for arthrofibrosis was time-barred; (2) oral argument before the commission was unnecessary; (3) he was not permitted to receive treatment from a doctor of his choosing; (4) he failed to establish his disability within two years of his accident; (5) employer properly and timely served all correspondence upon claimant, who was representing himself pro se before the commission; (6) claimant failed to establish he suffered a permanent disability within three years; and (7) arthrofibrosis was not a compensable occupational disease under Code § 65.2-400. 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 Wooten v. Intermet Foundry, VWC File No. 223-57-04 (Aug. 19, 2009). 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.
Claimant also contends the commission erred in stating he received surgery on his knee. The commission erroneously stated appellant received knee surgery once in its opinion. In the context of the entire record, we treat this apparent inconsistency as a scrivener's error and read the sentence as "The claimant said that he suffered arthrofibrosis as a direct result of his knee injury, and that he should be considered as having an occupational disease."
Affirmed.