Wampler-Longacre, Inc. v. Shirley M. Young
This text of Wampler-Longacre, Inc. v. Shirley M. Young (Wampler-Longacre, Inc. v. Shirley M. Young) 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: Chief Judge Moon, Senior Judges Cole and Duff
WAMPLER-LONGACRE, INC. AND PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY MEMORANDUM OPINION * PER CURIAM v. Record No. 1506-95-3 NOVEMBER 21, 1995
SHIRLEY M. YOUNG
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Cathleen P. Welsh; Wharton, Aldhizer & Weaver, on brief), for appellants.
(A. Thomas Lane, Jr., on brief), for appellee.
Wampler-Longacre, Inc. and its insurer (hereinafter
collectively referred to as "employer") contend that the Workers'
Compensation Commission erred in finding that Shirley M. Young's
left lateral epicondylitis and right trigger thumb qualify as
compensable occupational diseases within the meaning of "disease"
under the Workers' Compensation Act ("the Act"). Upon reviewing
the record and the briefs of the parties, we conclude that this
appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the
commission's decision. Rule 5A:27.
* Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication. The facts are not in dispute. The parties stipulated that
Young's job as a poultry worker required repetitive use of her
hands and arms and that she was not exposed to the causative
hazards of these conditions outside of her employment. They also
stipulated that Dr. Edward G. Chappell, Jr., Young's treating
orthopedic surgeon, told her, on February 17, 1994, that she
suffered from right trigger thumb and left lateral epicondylitis
related to her work. Dr. Chappell opined that Young's conditions
were "a consequence of her work" and that her job "directly
resulted" in these conditions. Dr. Chappell defined these
conditions as "repetitive motion disorders." Based upon Dr.
Chappell's opinions and the medical dictionary definitions of
epicondylitis and trigger finger, the commission found that
Young's conditions constituted "diseases" caused by her
employment. 1
The commission did not err in using the general medical
definitions of epicondylitis and trigger finger to find that
Young's conditions qualified as "diseases." In Perdue Farms, Inc. v. McCutchan, 21 Va. App. 65, 69, 461 S.E.2d 431, 433
(1995), we used the definition of carpal tunnel syndrome in
Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary to find that it 1 Using the Sloan-Dorland Medical Legal Dictionary, the commission defined epicondylitis as an "inflammation of the epicondyle or the tissues adjoining the epicondyle of the humerus." Using the same dictionary, the commission defined trigger finger as "due to stenosing tendovaginitis." The dictionary defined tendovaginitis as the "same as tenosynovitis," which is an "inflammation of a tendon sheath."
2 qualified as a "disease" under the definition of disease we
adopted in Piedmont Mfg. Co. v. East, 17 Va. App. 499, 503, 438
S.E.2d 769, 772 (1993). The Sloan-Dorland definitions place
epicondylitis and trigger finger within the definition of disease
set forth in Piedmont and approved of in Perdue.
On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable
to the prevailing party below. R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v.
Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). This
Court will uphold the commission's factual findings if supported
by credible evidence. James v. Capitol Steel Constr. Co., 8 Va.
App. 512, 515, 382 S.E.2d 487, 488 (1989).
As in Perdue, Young's conditions did not present as
obvious, sudden, mechanical or structural changes in her body.
Rather, credible evidence supports the commission's finding that
Young's left lateral epicondylitis and right trigger thumb are
conditions characterized as "diseases" within the meaning of the
Act.
Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision. Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Wampler-Longacre, Inc. v. Shirley M. Young, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wampler-longacre-inc-v-shirley-m-young-vactapp-1995.