Staunton Correctional Center/Commonwealth of Virginia v. Sanderson4/12/2005
Staunton Correctional Center/Commonwealth of Virginia (employer) appeals a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission granting Gary L. Sanderson's (claimant) June 14, 2002 change-in-condition application and awarding him temporary partial and temporary total disability benefits for various dates beginning June 4, 1999 through December 6, 2001. Employer contends the commission erred in finding that the doctrine of imposition applied to toll the twenty-four month limitations period contained in Code § 65.2-708(A) and the ninety-day period as set forth in Rule 1.2(B), Rules of the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission. For the following reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
In accordance with familiar appellate principles, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to claimant, the prevailing party below. SeeR.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). Furthermore,
" actual findings of the commission that are supported by credible evidence are conclusive and binding upon this Court on appeal." The commission's findings, if supported by credible evidence or reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence, will not be disturbed upon review, even though the record may contain evidence to support a contrary finding.
Watts v. P & J Hauling, Inc., 41 Va. App. 278, 283, 584 S.E.2d 457, 460 (2003) (citations omitted).
On April 21, 1995, claimant filed a Claim for Benefits alleging an April 20, 1992 injury by accident while working for employer, and requesting disability benefits for various dates. On August 31, 1995, the commission found the claim to be compensable and awarded claimant medical benefits and temporary partial disability benefits for various dates, ending on April 5, 1995.
On November 15, 1999, the commission, pursuant to the parties' stipulations, entered an order awarding claimant additional compensation benefits for various dates, ending on March 10, 1999. That order, entered for record purposes only, reflected that claimant had received ninety-two days of full wages in lieu of compensation through and including August 9, 1998 and thereafter received full wages for his missed time, allocated as two-thirds to workers' compensation and one-third to personal leave.
In March 2000, the commission consolidated its file in claimant's claim for an April 12, 1995 injury with the file for his original April 20, 1992 injury, as the April 12, 1995 injury constituted an exacerbation of the original injury.
On June 14, 2002, after the applicable limitations period had expired on March 10, 2001, claimant filed an application for additional benefits based on a change in condition, for various dates from June 4, 1999 through December 6, 2001. The parties stipulated that claimant had been paid in full for the time missed during that period, and therefore, any award would be for record purposes only. Employer defended against the claim contending that it was barred by the limitations period contained in Code § 65.2-708(A), as well as the ninety-day rule, Rule 1.2. Claimant asserted that imposition applied to toll the limitations period and Rule 1.2.
Claimant testified that he worked for employer for twenty-nine years, ending on December 9, 2002, when employer's facility closed. When claimant needed to go to the doctor for treatment or if his doctor instructed him to take time off from work due to his compensable back injury, he notified his supervisor, Janice Knight, and requested leave. Knight then notified Dorothea Fields, employer's timekeeper, of claimant's request. While claimant acknowledged that from 1999 forward no one employed by Staunton C
Page 1 2 3 4 Virginia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|