COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Annunziata, Agee and Senior Judge Coleman 

GIANT FOOD, INC. 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 2668-01-4 PER CURIAM 

 FEBRUARY 12, 2002 

PATRICIA A. GRANINGER 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Samantha D. Vanterpool; Jordan Coyne & 

Savits, L.L.P., on briefs), for appellant. 

 (James E. Swiger; Swiger & Cay, on brief), 

for appellee. 

 

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 

 Giant Food, Inc. (employer) contends the Workers' 

Compensation Commission erred in finding that Patricia A. 

Graninger (claimant) proved that arthroscopic surgery to her 

right ankle was reasonable and necessary to treat her 

compensable November 12, 1999 injury. Upon reviewing the record 

and the parties' briefs, we conclude that this appeal is without 

merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's 

decision. Rule 5A:27. 

 Factual findings made by the commission will be upheld on 

appeal if supported by credible evidence. See James v. Capitol 

Steel Constr. Co., 8 Va. App. 512, 515, 382 S.E.2d 487, 488 

(1989). Furthermore, "[i]n determining whether credible 
evidence exists, the appellate court does not retry the facts, 

reweigh the preponderance of the evidence, or make its own 

determination of the credibility of the witnesses." Wagner 

Enters., Inc. v. Brooks, 12 Va. App. 890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 

(1991). 

 In ruling employer was responsible for the cost of 

arthroscopic surgery recommended by Dr. John A. Bruno, Jr. on or 

about June 12, 2000, the commission found as follows: 

 Dr. Bruno has recommended arthroscopic 

surgery as a diagnostic and therapeutic 

tool. In December 1999, he reported that 

the claimant's ankle sprain was resolving. 

At a January 6, 2000, appointment, Dr. Bruno 

noted no swelling and improved strength in 

the ankle. All of his reports prior to the 

February 3, 2000, IME reflect that the 

claimant's mild strain continued to improve. 

Dr. [Anthony] Debs attempted to thoroughly 

examine [claimant] and was met with 

resistance. Although the fact that 

Dr. Bruno's reports before the February 3, 

2000, IME reflect that the claimant's strain 

was improving is troubling, he is her 

treating physician and is the only physician 

who has expressed an opinion on the need for 

surgery. We are reluctant to substitute our 

judgment for his judgment on the indication, 

or lack thereof, for surgery. Therefore, we 

find that the claimant has proven that the 

recommended surgery is reasonable and 

necessary based on Dr. Bruno's opinion. 

 Dr. Bruno's opinion, which was consistent with his prior 

written reports of February 22, 2000 and March 7, 2000, provides 

credible evidence to support the commission's finding. As fact 

finder, the commission was entitled to weigh the medical 

evidence and to accept the undisputed opinion of the treating 

- 2 -
physician, Dr. Bruno. The commission resolved any conflicts in 

the evidence between claimant's objective findings and 

Dr. Bruno's recommendation of surgery in favor of claimant. 

Based upon Dr. Bruno's opinion, the commission could reasonably 

conclude that the arthroscopic surgery was reasonable and 

necessary as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the treatment 

of claimant's compensable ankle injury. 

 Because credible evidence supports the commission's 

finding, we will not disturb it on appeal. Accordingly, we 

affirm the commission's decision. 

Affirmed.

- 3 -