Town of Waverly Law Enforcement v. Owens

657 S.E.2d 161, 51 Va. App. 277, 2008 Va. App. LEXIS 79
CourtCourt of Appeals of Virginia
DecidedFebruary 19, 2008
DocketRecord 1233-07-2
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 657 S.E.2d 161 (Town of Waverly Law Enforcement v. Owens) 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.

Bluebook
Town of Waverly Law Enforcement v. Owens, 657 S.E.2d 161, 51 Va. App. 277, 2008 Va. App. LEXIS 79 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

WILLIAM G. PETTY, Judge.

Appellants, Town of Waverly Law Enforcement and Virginia Municipal Group Self-Insurance Association (collectively, “employer”), appeal a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission granting Owens benefits. Employer argues that the commission erroneously applied the presumption of occupational disease as provided in Code § 65.2-402(B). Based on *279 the record before us, we determine that the commission applied the law correctly; thus, we affirm.

I. Background

On appeal, we construe the evidence in the light most favorable to Owens, as the party prevailing below. Whitlock v. Whitlock Mechanical/Check Servs., Inc., 25 Va.App. 470, 479, 489 S.E.2d 687, 692 (1997). On November 2, 2005, Owens filed a workers’ compensation claim alleging an occupational disease after he suffered a heart attack. He was a police officer for the Town of Waverly, where he had worked since October 14, 2002. The parties stipulated that the Town did not request nor conduct a preemployment physical examination as set forth in Code § 65.2-402(D).

Employer contested the workers’ compensation claim, arguing that Owens was not entitled to the presumption of Code § 65.2-402. In the absence of “a preponderance of competent evidence to the contrary,” Code § 65.2-402(B) affords a police officer suffering from heart disease a presumption that his heart disease was caused by his or her employment and is a compensable “occupational disease, suffered in the line of duty.” The employer also maintained that, absent the presumption, Owens’ heart disease was an ordinary disease of life that was not compensable.

The commission rejected employer’s argument and awarded Owens compensation benefits. In doing so, it found that employer had failed to ask Owens to take a preemployment physical examination and that Owens had never been told that he suffered from heart disease prior to his heart attack. Accordingly, the commission held that the presumption applied in this case and that the employer “failed to exclude a work related cause and therefore failed to rebut the presumption that claimant’s heart disease is an occupational disease.” This appeal followed.

II. Analysis

Employer raises two issues on appeal. First, employer argues that the commission made an error of law when it *280 held that Owens was entitled to the statutory presumption in the absence of a preemployment physical examination. Employer reasons that changes to the statute made as a result of the 1991 recodification of the Workers’ Compensation Act superseded our Supreme Court’s holding in City of Waynesboro v. Harter, 222 Va. 564, 281 S.E.2d 911 (1981). Employer also contends that, in the absence of the presumption, the evidence shows only that Owens’ heart disease was a noncompensable ordinary disease of life. Because this case involves the interpretation of a statute, we review the commission’s legal determination de novo. Crawford v. Haddock, 270 Va. 524, 528, 621 S.E.2d 127, 129 (2005). Based upon that review, we hold that the commission correctly applied the presumption of Code § 65.2-402; therefore, we need not reach employer’s second issue.

A. City of Waynesboro v. Harter

At the time our Supreme Court decided Harter, Code § 65.1-47.1 afforded police officers a presumption of causation in workers’ compensation claims arising from heart disease, just as Code § 65.2-402 does now. However, Code § 65.1-47.1 stated, in pertinent part, that the presumption only applied “provided that prior to making any claim based upon such presumption, such ... [police officer] shall have been found free from ... heart disease ... by a physical examination which shall include such appropriate laboratory and other diagnostic studies as the [employer] shall prescribe....”

In Harter, as in this case, the employer argued that the claimant was not entitled to the statutory presumption because he did not receive a preemployment physical examination. Our Supreme Court held that the word “shall,” used repeatedly in Code § 65.1-47.1, imposed an affirmative duty upon employers to conduct preemployment physical examinations before they could defeat the presumption by establishing that the claimant suffered a preexisting heart condition. Harter, 222 Va. at 567, 281 S.E.2d at 913. In rejecting the employer’s argument, the Court reasoned:

*281 The interpretation urged on us by the City would eviscerate § 65.1-47.1 and defeat the obvious legislative intent. Not only would it give the employer the ability to defeat the statutory presumption, but it would also discourage municipalities from giving pre-employment examinations.

Id. at 567, 281 S.E.2d at 913. Thus, our Supreme Court affirmed the disability benefits award even though Harter had not undergone a preemployment physical. Id.

B. Recodification Of The Workers’ Compensation Act

In 1991, some ten years after the Harter decision, the General Assembly recodified the Workers’ Compensation Act. See 1991 Va. Acts, c. 355. During that recodification, Code § 65.1-47.1 became Code § 65.2-402. Id. Code § 65.2-402 provides, in pertinent part, that “heart disease causing the ... impairment resulting in total or partial disability of ... members of ... town police departments ... shall be presumed to be [an] occupational disease[ ], suffered in the line of duty, ... covered by this title unless such presumption is overcome by a preponderance of competent evidence to the contrary.” Code § 65.2-402(B). The statute imposes the following limitation on the applicability of the presumption: “The presumption[ ] ... shall only apply if persons entitled to invoke [it] have, if requested by the [employer], ... undergone preemployment physical examinations.... ” Code § 65.2-402(D) (emphasis added).

Employer roots his argument in this statutory change, arguing that the phrase “if requested by the [employer]” in Code § 65.2-402(D) was specifically added to eliminate the mandatory nature of the preemployment physical as discussed in Harter. Thus, employer reasons that Harter was superseded by Code § 65.2-402 and therefore does not control the outcome of this case. Employer concludes that Code § 65.2-402 does not mandate that employers conduct a preemployment physical before asserting a bar to the presumption. Employer concludes that its failure to request that Owens undergo a physical examination makes the presumption of *282 Code § 65.2-402 unavailable to him. We are not, however, persuaded by this argument.

C. Code § 65.2-402

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Roanoke Ambulatory Surgery Center v. Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc.
822 S.E.2d 675 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2019)
Prophet v. BULLOCK CORP.
718 S.E.2d 477 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2011)
Utility Trailer Manufacturing Co. v. Testerman
711 S.E.2d 232 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2011)
Hodnett v. Stanco Masonry, Inc.
708 S.E.2d 429 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2011)
Gordon v. Ford Motor Co.
674 S.E.2d 545 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
657 S.E.2d 161, 51 Va. App. 277, 2008 Va. App. LEXIS 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-waverly-law-enforcement-v-owens-vactapp-2008.