Fieldcrest Cannon, Inc. v. Wanda B. Marshall
This text of Fieldcrest Cannon, Inc. v. Wanda B. Marshall (Fieldcrest Cannon, Inc. v. Wanda B. Marshall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
FIELDCREST CANNON, INC. MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 2567-96-2 PER CURIAM APRIL 1, 1997 WANDA B. MARSHALL
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Gregory T. Casker; Daniel, Vaughan, Medley & Smitherman, on brief), for appellant. (Geoffrey R. McDonald; Laura L. Geller; McDonald & Snesil, on brief), for appellee.
This appeal stems from a February 28, 1995 award entered by
the Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) to Wanda B.
Marshall (claimant) approving a Memorandum of Agreement executed
by claimant and Fieldcrest Cannon, Inc. (employer) which provided
benefits for claimant's right carpal tunnel syndrome. After the
Supreme Court's decision in The Stenrich Group v. Jemmott, 251
Va. 186, 467 S.E.2d 795 (1996), employer moved the commission to
vacate the award, arguing that the commission had no subject
matter jurisdiction over the claim. The commission refused, and
employer appeals. Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of
the parties, we find that this appeal is without merit.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's decision. Rule
5A:27.
In the case at bar we are constrained to observe the * Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication. doctrine of res judicata, in which "a point once adjudicated by a
court of competent jurisdiction may be relied upon as conclusive
upon the same matter as between the parties or their privies, in
any subsequent suit, in the same court or any other court, at law
or in chancery." Patterson v. Saunders, 194 Va. 607, 611, 74
S.E.2d 204, 207 (1953). "A plea of res judicata will be
sustained if the prior adjudication was between the same parties
or their privies and a valid final judgment was entered which
resolved the claim on its merits." Waterfront Marine Constr.,
Inc. v. North End 49ers, 251 Va. 417, 430, 468 S.E.2d 894, 902
(1996); see Bates v. Devers, 214 Va. 667, 670-71, 202 S.E.2d 917,
920-21 (1974).
Employer argues that res judicata does not apply because the
commission never had subject matter jurisdiction and that the
award was therefore void ab initio. This argument is
disingenuous. When the parties submitted the executed memorandum
of agreement, the commission found that it had jurisdiction to
award benefits. Employer had every opportunity to contest the
claim, but it chose to agree to its compensability and the
commission entered an award. Employer did not appeal the
commission's award, therefore the award became a point
"adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction [to be] relied
upon as conclusive upon the same matter as between the parties."
The case before us today is the same matter between the same
parties, and the commission's past award continues to bind the
2 parties. 1
Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the commission.
Affirmed.
1 We note that, were we to revisit the issue of claimant's entitlement to benefits, we would not retroactively apply Jemmott to vacate her award. As Jemmott overruled the past consistent decisions of both the commission and this Court, and as a retrospective application would result in substantial inequity to claimants whose claims in tort are now barred by the statute of limitations, Jemmott should be applied only prospectively. See City of Richmond v. Blaylock, 247 Va. 250, 252, 440 S.E.2d 598, 599 (1994); Harper v. Virginia Dep't of Taxation, 241 Va. 232, 237-40, 401 S.E.2d 868, 871-73 (1991).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Fieldcrest Cannon, Inc. v. Wanda B. Marshall, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fieldcrest-cannon-inc-v-wanda-b-marshall-vactapp-1997.