Joyce Schaar Good v American Safety Razor Co, etal

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: 	Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
JOYCE SCHAAR GOOD
v. 	Record No. 1120-95-3 	MEMORANDUM OPINION*
PER CURIAM
AMERICAN SAFETY RAZOR COMPANY 	NOVEMBER 14, 1995
AND
EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Robert B. Armstrong, on brief), for appellant.
(Matthew W. Broughton; Monica L. Taylor; Gentry,
Locke, Rakes & Moore, on brief), for appellees.
Joyce S. Good ("claimant") contends that the Workers'
Compensation Commission erred in finding that American Safety
Razor Co. ("employer") proved that Good was able to return to her
pre-injury work as of October 12, 1993. 	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.
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). 	"[I]t
is fundamental that a finding of fact made by the Commission is
conclusive and binding upon this court on review. 	A question
raised by conflicting medical opinion is a question of fact."

2
Commonwealth v. Powell, 2 Va. App. 712, 714, 347 S.E.2d 532, 533
(1986). 	"The fact that there is contrary evidence in the record
is of no consequence if there is credible evidence to support the
commission's finding." 	Wagner Enters., Inc. v. Brooks, 12 Va.
App. 890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1991).
The commission accepted the opinion of the treating
physician, Dr. David S. Klein, that claimant was able to perform
her pre-injury work without restriction as of October 12, 1993.
Dr. Klein's opinion was based upon his continuous treatment of
claimant, her normal physical examinations, and his approval of
the job description submitted by employer. 	Dr. Teresa M. Harmon,
a licensed clinical psychologist, agreed with Dr. Klein's opinion
that claimant should return to work. 	The opinions of Drs. Klein
and Harmon constitute credible evidence to support the
commission's decision.
In its role as fact finder, the commission was entitled to
give little weight to the medical reports of Dr. James Walker, a
chiropractor, and to reject the opinion of Dr. Donald P.K. Chan,
an orthopedic surgeon. 	Dr. Walker refused to comment on
claimant's ability to return to work in November 1993 because he
was not familiar with her job description. 	Dr. Chan, who
examined the claimant on one occasion and found disability based
on claimant's subjective complaints, deferred to Dr. Klein's
judgment as to claimant's ability to work. 	"It lies within the
commission's authority to determine the facts and the weight of

3
the evidence, and its findings in that regard, when supported by
credible evidence, will not be disturbed on appeal." 	Rose v.
Red's Hitch & Trailer Servs., Inc., 11 Va. App. 55, 60, 396
S.E.2d 392, 395 (1990).
For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.