1414963•Hubert Chambers v Bridgeport Piedmont, et al.
Testo completo
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis HUBERT CHAMBERS v. Record No. 1414-96-3 MEMORANDUM OPINION* PER CURIAM BRIDGEPORT PIEDMONT MANUFACTURING SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 COMPANY AND HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Robert E. Evans, on brief), for appellant. Appellant submitting on brief. (Gregory P. Cochran; Caskie & Frost, on brief), for appellees. Appellees submitting on brief. Hubert Chambers contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that his tendinitis was not an occupational "disease" under the Workers' Compensation Act. In denying Chambers' claim, the commission relied upon the Supreme Court's holding that "job-related impairments resulting from cumulative trauma caused by repetitive motion, however labeled or however defined, are, as a matter of law, not compensable under the present provisions of the Act." Stenrich Group v. Jemmott, 251 Va. 186, 199, 467 S.E.2d 795, 802 (1996). The evidence proved that Chambers had "a cumulative repetitive overuse tendonitis syndrome." Thus, we agree with the commission's ruling that Jemmott is dispositive of this issue. Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision. *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.
Affirmed.
1 printed pages contain little extracted OCR body text; searchable legal-body completeness has not been established for those pages.
OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis HUBERT CHAMBERS Vv. Record No. 1414-96-3 MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM BRIDGEPORT PIEDMONT MANUFACTURING SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 COMPANY AND HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Robert E. Evans, on brief), for appellant. Appellant submitting on brief. (Gregory P. Cochran; Caskie & Frost, on brief), for appellees. Appellees submitting on brief. Hubert Chambers contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that his tendinitis was not an occupational "disease" under the Workers! Compensation Act. In denying Chambers' claim, the commission relied upon the Supreme Court's holding that "job-related impairments resulting from cumulative trauma caused by repetitive motion, however labeled or however defined, are, as a matter of law, not compensable under the present provisions of the Act." Stenrich Group v. Jemmott, 251 Va. 186, 199, 467 S.E.2d 795, 802 (1996). The evidence proved that Chambers had "a cumulative repetitive overuse tendonitis syndrome." Thus, we agree with the commission's ruling that Jemmott is dispositive of this issue. Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision. "Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication. Affirmed.
Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude
Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.