2031051•John D. McPhatter v. Norfolk (City of) Sheriff�s Office
Gesamter Gesetzestext
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judge McClanahan, Senior Judges Coleman and Annunziata JOHN D. McPHATTER MEMORANDUM OPINION* v. Record No. 2031-05-1 PER CURIAM JANUARY 10, 2006 NORFOLK (CITY OF) SHERIFF’S OFFICE FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Matthew H. Kraft; Rutter Mills, L.L.P., on brief), for appellant. (Joan E. Mahoney, Deputy City Attorney, on brief), for appellee. John D. McPhatter (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that (1) Norfolk (City of) Sheriff’s Office rebutted the presumption contained in Code § 65.2-402, because it proved that occupational stress did not cause claimant’s heart condition and that there was a non-work-related cause of the heart attack; and (2) claimant failed to prove that his heart attack, if compensable, aggravated his psychological problems. 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 McPhatter v. Norfolk (City of) Sheriff’s Office, VWC File No. 210-63-82 (July 26, 2005). 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. * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.