Angela M. Acord v. Family Dollar Stores of W. Va., LLC

• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court
• Decided: November 26, 2024
• Docket: 23-630
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED November 26, 2024 C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

Angela M. Acord, Claimant Below, Petitioner

v.) No. 23-630 (JCN: 2014027025) (ICA No. 23-ICA-214)

Family Dollar Stores of W. Va., LLC, Employer Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Petitioner Angela M. Acord appeals the September 26, 2023, memorandum decision of the Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia (“ICA”). See Acord v. Family Dollar Stores of W. Va., LLC, No. 23-ICA-214, 2023 WL 6290097 (W. Va. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2023) (memorandum decision). Respondent Family Dollar Stores of W. Va., LLC filed a response.1 The issue on appeal is whether the ICA erred in affirming the April 26, 2023, decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review, which affirmed the claim administrator’s September 26, 2022, order denying the addition of various diagnoses to the claim.2

The claimant asserts that the record supports the addition of sacrococcygeal disorder and sacroiliitis as compensable diagnoses. The employer counters by arguing that the Board of Review properly affirmed the claim administrator’s denial of the addition of sacrococcygeal disorder and sacroiliitis. The employer argues that sacrococcygeal disorder and sacroiliitis do not describe injuries but constitute vague symptoms or general diagnoses that should not be held compensable.

This Court reviews questions of law de novo, while we accord deference to the Board of Review’s findings of fact unless the findings are clearly wrong. Syl. Pt. 3, Duff v. Kanawha Cnty. Comm’n, 250 W. Va. 510, 905 S.E.2d 528 (2024). Upon consideration of the record and briefs, we find no reversible error and therefore summarily affirm. See W. Va. R. App. P. 21(c).

Affirmed.

1 The claimant is represented by counsel Reginald D. Henry and Lori J. Withrow, and the employer is represented by counsel Jeffrey B. Brannon. 2 The claim administrator denied the addition of SI pain, right SI pain, arthrodesis, sacrococcygeal disorder, and sacroiliitis as compensable conditions, but the claimant only challenges the denial of the diagnoses of sacrococcygeal disorder and sacroiliitis. 1 ISSUED: November 26, 2024

CONCURRED IN BY:

Chief Justice Tim Armstead Justice Elizabeth D. Walker Justice John A. Hutchison Justice William R. Wooton Justice C. Haley Bunn