COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis 

BARRY WOODWARD 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 1389-97-1 PER CURIAM 

 OCTOBER 7, 1997 

AMOCO OIL COMPANY 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (W. Mark Broadwell, on brief), for appellant. 

 (Richard B. Donaldson, Jr.; Kevin W. 

Grierson; Jones, Blechman, Woltz & Kelly, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 Barry Woodward appeals a decision of the Workers' 

Compensation Commission denying his claim for compensation 

benefits for disability due to diabetes mellitus, a nervous 

system imbalance, and gastroparesis. Woodward contends that the 

commission erred in finding that he failed to prove that these 

conditions were causally related to his compensable January 21, 

1994 injury by accident. Finding no error, we affirm. 

 On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable 

to the prevailing party below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. 

Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). So 

viewed, the evidence established that on January 21, 1994, while 

in the course of his employment, Woodward struck his head while 

passing under a waste heat boiler and fell to his knees. Later 

that day, Woodward was treated at an emergency room, where a 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
 2 

physician diagnosed a cervical thoracic strain. A week later, 

Woodward sought emergency room treatment for abdominal pain and 

diarrhea. 

 Dr. Donald Richardson examined Woodward on February 22, 

1995. Although Dr. Richardson referred to a lumbar diskectomy in 

1990 and whiplash injury in 1989, he did not note the January 21, 

1994 industrial accident in his description of Woodward's medical 

history. Dr. Richardson noted that Woodward had a history of 

diabetes mellitus since March 1994 and indicated that Woodward 

suffered from glycemic control of diabetes, gastrointestinal 

complaints, and headaches. Dr. Richardson did not identify a 

cause of Woodward's diabetes. However, he opined that Woodward's 

numerous gastrointestinal complaints could originate from many 

sources and his headaches were probably muscular-skeletal. 

 On July 19, 1995, Dr. Richardson diagnosed Woodward as 

suffering from diabetic gastroparesis (stomach paralysis from 

diabetes), which had caused him to miss work. However, Dr. 

Richardson did not render an opinion as to the cause of this 

condition. 

 In March 1995, Woodward received medical treatment on four 

occasions over a seven-day period from Dr. Harold J. Kornylak, an 

osteopath. Dr. Kornylak diagnosed "severe autonomic nervous 

system imbalance, including severe sympathetic overstimulation, 

which could account for [Woodward's] hyperglycemia, 

gastroparesis, hyperacidity and elevated catacholamines in his 
 3 

blood work." Dr. Kornylak opined that these "disabilities . . . 

 were precipitated by [Woodward's] neck injury." 

 Dr. T. Eugene Temple, Jr., who is certified in internal 

medicine, endocrinology and metabolism, reviewed Woodward's 

medical records for employer. Dr. Temple opined that Woodward's 

diabetes mellitus was unrelated to the industrial accident. In 

addition, he opined that Woodward's abdominal pain, 

gastrointestinal problems, gastroparesis, and autonomic 

neuropathy were not related to the industrial accident. 

 In denying Woodward's application, the commission found as 

follows: 

 Dr. Richardson has not stated 

[Woodward's] diabetes and related problems 

were caused by the January 21, 1994 

industrial accident. Although Dr. 

Richardson's reports do not identify a cause, 

his medical history does not even identify 

the industrial accident in the medical 

history. Dr. Temple denies any causal 

relationship. Dr. Kornylak believes 

[Woodward's] problems are related. 

 [Woodward] had the burden of proof to 

establish the causal relationship by a 

preponderance of the evidence. The 

Commission gives great weight to the opinion 

of the treating physician which in this case 

would be Dr. Richardson. Because the 

treating physician has not related the 

problems to the accident nor identified it as 

a possible cause and in view of the dispute 

between the other nontreating doctors, we 

find the burden of proof has not been met. 

 In its role as fact finder, the commission was entitled to 

weigh the medical evidence and to resolve the conflicts between 

the various medical opinions in favor of employer. "Questions 
 4 

raised by conflicting medical opinions must be decided by the 

commission." Penley v. Island Creek Coal Co., 8 Va. App. 310, 

318, 381 S.E.2d 231, 236 (1989). Based upon the lack of 

persuasive medical evidence establishing a causal connection 

between Woodward's diabetes and various other problems and the 

January 21, 1994 industrial accident, we cannot say as a matter 

of law that Woodward's evidence sustained his burden of proof. 

Accordingly, the commission's findings are binding and conclusive 

upon us. See Tomko v. Michael's Plastering Co., 210 Va. 697, 

699, 173 S.E.2d 833, 835 (1970). 

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

 Affirmed.