From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Virginia Supermarkets v. George

Court of Appeals of Virginia
May 31, 1994
445 S.E.2d 156 (Va. Ct. App. 1994)

Summary

remanding to the commission to make a factual finding whether George's carpal tunnel syndrome was a disease

Summary of this case from Shoppers Food Ware. v. Cummins

Opinion

49464 No. 1715-93-2

Decided May 31, 1994

(1) Workers' Compensation — Benefits — Occupational Disease. — Code Sec. 65.2-46 requires that the condition for which compensation is sought as an occupational disease must first qualify as a disease.

Glenn S. Phelps (R. Ferrell Newman; Thompson, Smithers, Newman Wade, on brief), for appellants.

(Roger G. Hopper, on brief), for appellee.


SUMMARY

Employer appealed the decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission awarding benefits for an occupational disease, carpal tunnel syndrome. Employer argued that carpal tunnel syndrome is not a disease.

The Court of Appeals remanded, holding that the commission failed to make a finding that carpal tunnel syndrome is a disease.

Reversed and remanded.


OPINION


The Workers' Compensation Commission awarded Elizabeth Storm George compensation based upon a determination that she contracted an occupational disease, carpal tunnel syndrome. The sole issue on appeal is whether George's carpal tunnel syndrome is a disease within the meaning of Code Sec. 65.2-400 and the holding of Merillat Industries, Inc. v. Parks, 246 Va. 429, 436 S.E.2d 600 (1993).

(1) In Merillat, the claimant suffered from a torn rotator cuff which resulted from repetitive overhead lifting and manipulation with his left arm. The Supreme Court of Virginia held that a plain reading of Code Sec. 65.1-46, the occupational disease statute, requires that the condition for which compensation is sought as an occupational disease must first qualify as a disease. It concluded that the claimant's condition was not a disease.

Title 65.1, the Workers' Compensation Act, was recodified effective 1991 as Title 65.2. Code Sec. 65.1-46 was redesignated Sec. 65.2-400. There were no substantive changes.t

It appears from the record that the commission assumed but failed to find that George's carpal tunnel syndrome, which also resulted from repetitive activity, was a disease. That assumption was justified in light of this Court's holding that carpal tunnel syndrome is compensable as an occupational disease upon proof of the six requirements of Code Sec. 65.2-400. Knott v. Blue Bell, Inc., 7 Va. App. 335, 337 n.2, 373 S.E.2d 481, 482 n.2 (1988). However, we interpret Merillat to require a separate finding, based upon credible evidence, that the condition is a disease. Merillat, 246 Va. at 433, 436 S.E.2d at 602.

Therefore, we remand this case for the commission to make a factual finding whether George's carpal tunnel syndrome is a disease within the meaning of that term in Code Sec. 65.2-400. See Piedmont Manufacturing Co. v. East, 17 Va. App. 501, 438 S.E.2d 765 (1993); Department of State Police v. Haga, 18 Va. App. 162, 442 S.E.2d 424 (1994). In view of the developments in the law since this case was decided before the commission, we direct the commission to allow both parties the opportunity to present additional evidence concerning whether the condition is a disease.

Reversed and Remanded.

Elder, J., and Cole, S.J., concurred.


Summaries of

Virginia Supermarkets v. George

Court of Appeals of Virginia
May 31, 1994
445 S.E.2d 156 (Va. Ct. App. 1994)

remanding to the commission to make a factual finding whether George's carpal tunnel syndrome was a disease

Summary of this case from Shoppers Food Ware. v. Cummins

In Virginia Supermarkets v. George, 18 Va. App. ___, 445 S.E.2d 156 (1994), the commission failed to make any specific finding concerning whether the claimant had sustained a disease or an injury.

Summary of this case from Minick v. Safeway, Inc.
Case details for

Virginia Supermarkets v. George

Case Details

Full title:VIRGINIA SUPERMARKETS, T/A URBANNA MARKET AND OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE…

Court:Court of Appeals of Virginia

Date published: May 31, 1994

Citations

445 S.E.2d 156 (Va. Ct. App. 1994)
445 S.E.2d 156

Citing Cases

Minick v. Safeway, Inc.

Finding no error, we affirm. In Virginia Supermarkets v. George, 18 Va. App. ___, 445 S.E.2d 156 (1994), the…

Shoppers Food Ware. v. Cummins

Thus, we remand this case for the commission to make a factual determination whether claimant's carpal tunnel…