Mary Washington Health Center, et al v Iris Jones

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: 	Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Benton and Coleman
MARY WASHINGTON HEALTH CENTER AND
THE RECIPROCAL GROUP
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. 	Record No. 0959-99-2 	PER CURIAM
SEPTEMBER 21, 1999
IRIS N. JONES
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(John E. McIntosh, Jr.; Crews & Hancock,
P.L.C., on briefs), for appellants.
(Wesley G. Marshall, on brief), for appellee.
Mary Washington Health Center and its insurer (hereinafter
referred to as "employer") contend that the Workers'
Compensation Commission erred in awarding Iris N. Jones
temporary total disability benefits beginning January 1, 1997,
fourteen months before Jones filed her February 28, 1998
change-in-condition application requesting a resumption of
temporary total disability benefits beginning February 16, 1998.
Specifically, employer asserts that the full commission's award
on review (1) violated employer's due process rights; (2)
violated Rule 1.2B, Rules of the Virginia Workers' Compensation
Commission; and (3) was not supported by medical evidence
establishing causally-related disability for the period from
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code
§ 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.

- 2 -
January 1, 1997 through February 16, 1998. 	Upon reviewing the
records and briefs of the parties, we conclude that this appeal
is without merit. 	Accordingly, we summarily affirm the
commission's decision. 	See Rule 5A:27.
The record does not indicate that employer ever informed
the full commission of its objections to the commission's
decision on these grounds. 	By virtue of employer's timely
appeal to this Court, the record establishes that employer
received a copy of the commission's March 26, 1999 decision and
that the decision clearly indicated that the commission was
awarding Jones benefits beginning January 1, 1997, even though
Jones' application had only requested benefits beginning
February 16, 1998. 	The record does not show that employer ever
filed a motion to reconsider or set aside the full commission's
decision. 	Because employer did not raise these arguments before
the commission, we cannot consider them for the first time on
appeal. 	See Rule 5A:18; Green v. Warwick Plumbing & Heating
Corp., 5 Va. App. 409, 412-13, 364 S.E.2d 4, 6 (1998).
Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision.
Affirmed.