Case Law Blow v. York Cnty. Pub. Sch.

Blow v. York Cnty. Pub. Sch.

Document Cited Authorities (12) Cited in Related

UNPUBLISHED

Present: Chief Judge Decker, Judge Alston and Senior Judge Frank

Argued by teleconference

MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY JUDGE ROBERT P. FRANK

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION

Carolyn M. Blow, pro se.

Faraaz A. Jindani1 (Scott C. Ford; Ford Richardson, PC, on brief), for appellees.

Carolyn Blow, claimant, appeals a decision of the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission (the Commission) finding that she did not injure her neck in a work accident, her disability from January 2017 through May 22, 2017, was not related to a work accident, and York County Public Schools and Virginia Association of Counties Group (collectively "employer") were responsible for only her medical treatment at Patient First on August 12, 2015. On appeal, claimant contends that the Commission erred (1) in failing to consider all of her medical records and (2) in denying her claim for wage benefits and medical benefits. We affirm the Commission's decision.

BACKGROUND

On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to employer, the party prevailing below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212 (1990). So viewed, the evidence established the following:

Claimant was employed as a school bus driver for employer. During the summer, when school was not in session, her job required her to wash the school buses. On August 12, 2015, while washing a bus, she slipped on a slippery step from the top step of the bus, falling to the concrete floor. At the January 31, 2018 hearing before the deputy commissioner, claimant testified she injured her hip, back, and neck.2 However, we note that on her January 23, 2017 original claim for benefits, claimant indicated she injured her lower back, pelvis, shoulder, and spine, but not her neck.

Claimant visited Patient First on the same day of the injury. The medical records from that date indicated claimant suffered multiple contusions and was released to return to full duty on August 13, 2015. The medical records also state claimant's "Chief complaint" was "Fell down the steps and hit the lower back against the edge of the steps and fell on the concrete while washing a school bus."

Claimant went back to work "a couple of days" after the fall, and in December 2016, she claimed she was having "a lot of pain" "generating" in her shoulder. According to claimant, her doctor thought her shoulder pain "was coming from her neck." Claimant explained that although she worked from August 2015 until December 2016, she continued having physical problems with her neck, back, and right hip.

Claimant testified that she left work in December 2016, and, from December 2016 until May 22, 2017, she treated with Dr. Jackson B. Salvant, Jr., Dr. Jesus Lizarzaburu, and with medical providers at Rebound Chiropractic. She testified she told these medical providers about her August 12, 2015 work accident. Claimant explained that from December 2016 through May 2017, she complained of "a severe burning" in her neck, lower back pain, and numbness in her hand. Claimant testified that since August 12, 2015, she has had problems in her hip, back, and neck. Medical providers held claimant out of work from January 9, 2017 through May 22, 2017.

The following is a summary of claimant's medical treatment:

On December 30, 2016, claimant treated at Riverside Regional Primary, where she complained of right shoulder and neck pain for a week prior to December 30, 2016, and indicated her pain was worsening. The doctor's diagnosis notes also reflected "degenerative disease of neck and shoulder."

On December 31, 2016, claimant treated at Mary Immaculate Hospital, where she complained that she had had right shoulder pain for approximately one week. She indicated she did not suffer an injury, trauma or fall. The report stated "[t]here was no injury mechanism," and "[t]here is no history of shoulder injury."

On January 4, 2017, claimant treated with Michael B. Potter, M.D. at Tidewater Physicians Multispecialty Group for right shoulder pain. She completed a New Patient History Form in which she indicated her symptoms had started a week ago, but she did not have an injury. Dr. Potter's notes reflect claimant was under his care and was unable to work at that time. Dr. Potter's notes also stated claimant "may return back to work as of" January 9, 2017.

On January 17, 2017, claimant returned to Patient First, complaining of right shoulder pain that had begun approximately two weeks earlier. She reported that the pain "radiateddown" to her right hand. The history section of the office notes states, "This is a Worker's Compensation issue." The doctor diagnosed contusion of her right shoulder.

On February 3, 2017, claimant treated with Dr. Salvant at CIOX Health, complaining of numbness in her right hand for the past two years and pain radiating down her right shoulder and arm from her right neck for the last two months. Dr. Savant's assessment was "[r]ight-sided cervical radiculitis" and "[a]bnormal cervical radiographs with cervical spondylosis."

On March 6, 2017, claimant again treated with Dr. Salvant at Riverside Regional Medical for evaluation of the recently completed MRI scan of her cervical spine. She gave a history of "multiple falls" off of a bus. Dr. Salvant referred claimant back to her primary care physician and opined that her neck pain "may be due to muscular overuse or sprain."

On June 13, 2017, Dr. Jeffrey R. Carlson performed an Independent Medical Evaluation (IME) on claimant. Dr. Carlson reviewed claimant's medical records dating back to 2007 and completed a physical examination of claimant. Dr. Carlson's evaluation of claimant's medical records revealed past complaints of back pain as well as knee pain, knee arthritis, and a possible ACL injury. Dr. Carlson also reviewed claimant's MRI scan report, which revealed degenerative disc disease at C3 through C6 with mild spinal stenosis at C5-6. Dr. Carlson reviewed claimant's EMG/nerve conduction study, which revealed no cervical radiculopathy and borderline carpal tunnel syndrome.

Dr. Carlson's impression was that claimant had a fall on August 12, 2015, and was not having any pain in her neck, back, or hip prior to that accident. Dr. Carlson responded to the following questions that are relevant to this analysis:

Do you agree that any complaints, if any, [claimant] is currently experiencing to her lower back are not related to her August 12, 2015 work accident? She complained of back pain on the right side since her injury August 12, 2015 and was seen in the Emergency Room at Patient First for that back pain related to theAugust 12, 2105 incident, and her back and hip complaints could be related to that.
What injuries do you believe, if any, did the complainant sustain as a result of her August 12, 2015 accident? Please explain. I do believe that she injured her lower back with contusion of the right-sided lower back, buttocks and hip, as documented on her initial evaluation from Patient First from her injury on August 12, 2015.
Do you agree that no further medical treatment is reasonable, necessary, or related to [claimant]'s August 12, 2015 work accident? At this point she has almost completely resolved the lower back pain and hip pain, which is the only injury related to August 12, 2015. She would not need any further medical treatment at this time.
Do you agree that any complaints, if any, [complainant] is currently experiencing to her neck are not related to her August 12, 2015 work accident? Since the neck pain was not documented at the initial visit, I do not believe it is related to the August 12, 2015 incident.

On January 23, 2017, claimant filed a claim for benefits, alleging injuries to her lower back, pelvis, shoulder, and spine. She also filed claims for benefits on March 31, 2017, and June 6, 2017. Claimant requested compensation from December 31, 2016, through May 22, 2017, payment of certain medical bills, and a medical award.

The deputy commissioner found that claimant sustained compensable injuries to her low back and right hip on August 12, 2015 and found employer responsible for claimant's medical treatment at Patient First on August 12, 2015. However, the deputy found no medical evidence to support claimant's assertion that she suffered a neck injury on August 12, 2015, thus denying her claim for neck injury.

The deputy concluded as follows:

We now consider the claimant's medical treatment beginning December 2016 through the present and the claimant's request for compensation from December 2016 through May 2017. We recognize the claimant has treated with a number of medical providers since December 2016. However, upon careful review ofthe medical evidence, we find no medical evidence relating the claimant's medical treatment beginning in December 2016 through the present to her August 12, 2015 industrial accident besides Dr. Carlson's statement that claimant's current back and hip complaints "could be related" to her August 12, 2015 accident. We do not find Dr. Carlson's opinion on this issue rises to the level of medical causation. We recognize the claimant's testimony that since August 2015, she continued having problems with her neck, back, and right hip. However, we find it significant that there is no medical evidence that the claimant treated with any medical providers from August 2015 through December 2016.
The parties stipulated that the claimant was taken out of work from January 9, 2017 through May 22, 2017 and did not work for the employer from December 31, 2016 through May 22, 2017. Based upon medical records from Dr. Potter, we find the claimant's disability began on January 4, 2017. However, we find no medical evidence that the claimant's disability from January 2017 through May 22, 2017 was related to her industrial injury.

Upon review by the full Commission, the...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex