DIDLAKE, INC. v. GOODWIN, 0249-13-4. (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals of Virginia
Number: invaco20130618f69
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jun. 18, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2013
Summary: UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM OPINION * PER CURIAM. Didlake, Inc. and North River Insurance Company appeal a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission, which affirmed the award of disability benefits to Goodwin. Appellants argue that the commission erred by holding that (1) "Goodwin sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on January 11, 2011"; (2) "Goodwin proved a causal relation between his alleged disability and his employment"; and (3) "Goodwin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM OPINION * PER CURIAM. Didlake, Inc. and North River Insurance Company appeal a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission, which affirmed the award of disability benefits to Goodwin. Appellants argue that the commission erred by holding that (1) "Goodwin sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on January 11, 2011"; (2) "Goodwin proved a causal relation between his alleged disability and his employment"; and (3) "Goodwin m..
More
UNPUBLISHED
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
PER CURIAM.
Didlake, Inc. and North River Insurance Company appeal a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission, which affirmed the award of disability benefits to Goodwin. Appellants argue that the commission erred by holding that (1) "Goodwin sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on January 11, 2011"; (2) "Goodwin proved a causal relation between his alleged disability and his employment"; and (3) "Goodwin met his burden of proving the nature and extent of his alleged disability." We have reviewed the record and the commission's opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Goodwin v. Didlake, Inc., VWC File No. VA000-0042-6537 (Jan. 14, 2013). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.
Affirmed.
FootNotes
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
Source: Leagle
