ROMINGER LEGAL
Virginia Legal Research & Resources - VA Legal Resources
Need Legal Help?
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

LEGAL RESEARCH
COURT REPORTERS
PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS
PROCESS SERVERS
DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS
EXPERT WITNESSES

 

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

 
Web Rominger Legal

Legal News - Legal Headlines

 

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA






Present:  Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis





RIGOBERTO C. GUTIERREZ

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v.      Record No. 0013-00-3    PER CURIAM

                       MAY 9, 2000

ESPINA STONE COMPANY AND

NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY





       FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION



               (A. Thomas Lane, Jr., on brief), for

appellant.



               (Lynn McHale Fitzpatrick; Siciliano, Ellis,

Dyer & Boccarosse, on brief), for appellees.





       Rigoberto C. Gutierrez contends that the Workers'

Compensation Commission erred in finding that medical treatment

rendered to him by Dr. Alan Cason, a chiropractor, from

September 11, 1997 through January 19, 1998 was not medically

necessary and, therefore, Espina Stone Company was not

responsible for the cost of such treatment.  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.  See Rule 5A:27.

       "[T]he question of whether the disputed medical treatment

was necessary within the meaning of Code   65.2-603 is a mixed

question of law and fact."  Lynchburg Foundry Co. v. Goad, 15

Va. App. 710, 712-13, 427 S.E.2d 215, 217 (1993).

       In declining to hold employer responsible for the cost of

Dr. Cason's chiropractic treatment, the commission found as

follows:

       The Deputy Commissioner found the

opinions of Drs. [Gregory] Helm and [George]

Godette to be persuasive, and concluded that

the chiropractic treatment was not necessary

after August 26, 1997.  We agree.  Dr. Helm

stated on August 26, 1997, that continued

chiropractic care was not necessary.  

Although Dr. Cason performed forty-four

additional treatments from July 29, 1997

through January 19, 1998, he was unable to

return [Gutierrez] to work.  On February 3,

1998, Dr. Godette indicated that the

chiropractic treatments were perpetuating

the muscle injury.  Dr. Godette was able to

return [Gutierrez] to full-duty work in a

short period of time.  We also note that Dr.

Cason had the opportunity to treat

[Gutierrez] on seventy-five different

occasions through July 22, 1997, but was

unable to improve [Gutierrez's] condition to

the extent that [he] could return to work.  

When considering the evidence as a whole, we

agree with the Deputy Commissioner's

conclusion that Dr. Cason's treatment after

July 26, 1997, was not necessary . . . .

       As fact finder, the commission was entitled to accept the

opinions of Drs. Godette and Helm, which support the

commission's finding that Dr. Cason's medical treatment after

July 26, 1997 was not medically necessary.  Moreover, we find no

merit in Gutierrez's argument that he was entitled to continue

with Dr. Cason's unauthorized treatment until January 19, 1998,

the day he selected Dr. Godette from a panel as his treating

physician.  Gutierrez was aware as early as August 1997 that Dr.

Godette had opined that Dr. Cason's chiropractic treatment was

not necessary and, as a result, was no longer authorized.  

Indeed, Gutierrez requested a new panel of physicians from

employer.  When Gutierrez discovered, however, that the new

panel was defective, he chose to continue to treat with Dr.

Cason, an unauthorized physician.  The record contains no

justification for Gutierrez's failure to choose a new treating

physician or petition the commission for a change in treating

physicians.

       For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision.

                                                                                       Affirmed.



* Pursuant to Code   17.1-413, recodifying Code

 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.











- 3 -


Ask a Lawyer

 

 

FREE CASE REVIEW BY A LOCAL LAWYER!
|
|
\/

Personal Injury Law
Accidents
Dog Bite
Legal Malpractice
Medical Malpractice
Other Professional Malpractice
Libel & Slander
Product Liability
Slip & Fall
Torts
Workplace Injury
Wrongful Death
Auto Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bankruptcy
Chapter 7
Chapter 11
Business/Corporate Law
Business Formation
Business Planning
Franchising
Tax Planning
Traffic/Transportation Law
Moving Violations
Routine Infractions
Lemon Law
Manufacturer Defects
Securities Law
Securities Litigation
Shareholder Disputes
Insider Trading
Foreign Investment
Wills & Estates

Wills

Trusts
Estate Planning
Family Law
Adoption
Child Abuse
Child Custody
Child Support
Divorce - Contested
Divorce - Uncontested
Juvenile Criminal Law
Premarital Agreements
Spousal Support
Labor/Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Sexual Harassment
Age Discrimination
Workers Compensation
Real Estate/Property Law
Condemnation / Eminent Domain
Broker Litigation
Title Litigation
Landlord/Tenant
Buying/Selling/Leasing
Foreclosures
Residential Real Estate Litigation
Commercial Real Estate Litigation
Construction Litigation
Banking/Finance Law
Debtor/Creditor
Consumer Protection
Venture Capital
Constitutional Law
Discrimination
Police Misconduct
Sexual Harassment
Privacy Rights
Criminal Law
DUI / DWI / DOI
Assault & Battery
White Collar Crimes
Sex Crimes
Homocide Defense
Civil Law
Insurance Bad Faith
Civil Rights
Contracts
Estate Planning, Wills & Trusts
Litigation/Trials
Social Security
Worker's Compensation
Probate, Will & Trusts
Intellectual Property
Patents
Trademarks
Copyrights
Tax Law
IRS Disputes
Filing/Compliance
Tax Planning
Tax Power of Attorney
Health Care Law
Disability
Elder Law
Government/Specialty Law
Immigration
Education
Trade Law
Agricultural/Environmental
IRS Issues

 


Google
Search Rominger Legal


 


LEGAL HELP FORUM - Potential Client ? Post your question.
LEGAL HELP FORUM - Attorney? Answer Questions, Maybe get hired!

NOW - CASE LAW - All 50 States - Federal Courts - Try it for FREE


 


Get Legal News
Enter your Email


Preview

We now have full text legal news
drawn from all the major sources!!

ADD A SEARCH ENGINE TO YOUR PAGE!!!

TELL A FRIEND ABOUT ROMINGER LEGAL

Ask Your Legal Question Now.

Pennsylvania Lawyer Help Board

TERMS OF USE - DISCLAIMER - LINKING POLICIES

Created and Developed by
Rominger Legal
Copyright 1997 - 2009.

A Division of
ROMINGER, INC.