COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

ROMINGER LEGAL

Virginia Legal Research & Resources - VA Legal Resources

Need Legal Help?

LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER

LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS

NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This opinion or court case is from the Courts of Virginia. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Baker, Elder and Fitzpatrick

BURTON SWEET

v. Record No. 0004-95-4 MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
KMART CORPORATION MAY 23, 1995

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION

(John J. Grimaldi, II; Rosenthal, Rich, Grimaldi &
Guggenheim, on briefs), for appellant.

(Susan A. Evans; Siciliano, Ellis, Dyer & Boccarosse,
on brief), for appellee.

Burton Sweet contends that the Workers' Compensation
Commission erred in finding that his fall at work on February 9,
1993 was caused by an idiopathic condition and did not arise out
of his employment with KMart Corporation ("KMart"). 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.
The claimant worked for KMart as a stock replenisher. On
February 9, 1993, the claimant became dizzy and fatigued after
putting sixty-four ounce boxes of soap powder on the store's
shelves. Because he felt as if he was going to faint, he moved
towards the endcap (a shelving unit at the end of an aisle used
to hold display merchandise) in an attempt to sit down. As he
did so, he fell to the floor and bruised his head. The claimant
did not remember the fall, but stated that his co-workers told
him later that he had a seizure, fell, and lost consciousness.
He also stated that, during the few days before February 9, 1993,
he had suffered from flu-like symptoms.
Kiem Morton, a co-worker, witnessed the claimant's fall.
She saw the claimant begin to sway and then fall to the floor,
hitting the back of his head. Morton admitted that she was
truthful in her witness statement given to KMart on February 15,
1993, when she reported that the claimant fell to the floor
without hitting the shelf. Chris Stearns, another co-worker,
reported in his witness statement that he saw the claimant
"seize-up and then begin to fall." Stearns did not see the
claimant's body fall into any shelves or merchandise. Kimberly
Kirkland, employer's personnel and training manager, who was
called to the scene, saw the claimant lying perpendicular to the
endcap. Kirkland stated that the merchandise displayed on the
endcap was not disturbed.
The claimant was diagnosed as suffering from a seizure
disorder and given anti-convulsion medication. The claimant had
suffered from a prior grand mal seizure in November 1992 during
an abrupt withdrawal from the drug Halcion. He also had a past
history of cervical problems, having undergone a cervical
laminectomy in 1992.
On February 10, 1993, the claimant was treated by Dr. David
L. Evans, an internist, who had been following the claimant for
various medical conditions, including his November 1992 seizure.
Dr. Evans noted bruising to the claimant's head, right shoulder,
and left ribs. Dr. Evans noted that the claimant remembered
nothing about the February 9, 1993 fall, except that his vision
began to blur. Dr. Evans diagnosed a grand mal seizure, which he
believed was "probably [an] idiopathic disorder now that he's had
a 2nd seizure." Subsequent MRIs of the claimant's head and
cervical spine and an EEG revealed no abnormalities.
In his April 20, 1994 deposition, Dr. Evans testified that,
on February 10, 1993, the claimant remembered nothing about the
seizure, but reported that his co-workers told him that he hit
his head on the floor when he fell. Dr. Evans attributed the
claimant's head bruising to his movements during the seizure.
Dr. Evans stated that the flu can sometimes make patients with a
history of seizures more susceptible to recurrences. Dr. Evans
also believed that the claimant's fall exacerbated his
preexisting cervical condition. Dr. Evans testified that the
trauma suffered by the claimant when he hit his head on the floor
could have caused the seizure. However, Dr. Evans stated that,
as of October 25, 1993, he had not come to any conclusion as to
the basis for the claimant's seizure disorder.
On appellate review, 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). To
recover benefits, the claimant must establish that he suffered an
injury by accident "arising out of and in the course of his
employment," Code 65.2-101, and "that the conditions of the
workplace or that some significant work related exertion caused
the injury." Plumb Rite Plumbing Serv. v. Barbour, 8 Va. App.
482, 484, 382 S.E.2d 305, 306 (1989). "The phrase arising 'out
of' refers to the origin or cause of the injury." County of
Chesterfield v. Johnson, 237 Va. 180, 183, 376 S.E.2d 73, 74
(1989).
An idiopathic fall is "an accidental injury caused by a
preexisting personal disease of the employee." Southland Corp.
v. Parson, 1 Va. App. 281, 283, 338 S.E.2d 162, 163 (1985).
"When an employee's injuries result from an idiopathic condition
and no other factors intervene or operate to cause or contribute
to the injuries sustained as a result of the idiopathic
condition, no award shall be made." Virginia Dept. of Transp. v.
Mosebrook, 13 Va. App. 536, 538, 413 S.E.2d 350, 351-52 (1992)
(citation omitted). In other words, "'the effects of [an
idiopathic] fall are compensable if the employment places the
employee in a position increasing the dangerous effects of such a
fall, such as on a height, near machinery or sharp corners, or in
a moving vehicle.'" Southland Corp., 1 Va. App. at 284-85, 338
S.E.2d at 164 (citation omitted).
"Whether an injury arises out of the employment is a mixed
question of law and fact and is reviewable by the appellate
court." Plumb Rite, 8 Va. App. at 483, 382 S.E.2d at 305.
However, unless we conclude that the claimant proved, as a matter
of law, that his employment caused his injury, the commission's
finding is binding and conclusive on appeal. Tomko v. Michael's
Plastering Co., 210 Va. 697, 699, 173 S.E.2d 833, 835 (1970).
The commission denied the claimant's application, finding
that he sustained an idiopathic fall and that the evidence did
not prove that his employment added to the risk of his injuries.
The commission found that, "Dr. Evans attributed the injuries to
'flopping around' associated with the seizure. Striking the
floor during an idiopathic fall, standing alone, is not an added
risk of employment and is not a sufficient substantial employment
contribution to warrant an award of benefits."
The commission's finding that the claimant sustained an
idiopathic fall is supported by Dr. Evans' February 10, 1993
office notes and by the evidence of the claimant's preexisting
seizure history. This finding is also supported by Stearns, who
saw the claimant "seize-up" and then fall, and by Morton, who saw
the claimant sway and then fall. From this evidence, the
commission could reasonably conclude that the claimant suffered a
seizure which caused him to fall and sustain injuries.
The commission's finding that the claimant's injuries did
not arise out of his employment is also supported by the record.
There was no evidence that the claimant was placed in a position
which could have aggravated the effects of his fall. In
addition, there was no evidence of any factors peculiar to the
claimant's work environment that may have caused or contributed
to the injuries he sustained as a result of the fall. The
statements of Morton, Stearns, and Kirkland support the
commission's finding that the claimant's body did not hit the
endcap when he fell.
Based upon this record, the claimant did not prove as a
matter of law that his injuries arose out of his employment.
Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Virginia Legal Research & Resources - VA Legal Resources
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE