COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis 

TOWN OF LEBANON POLICE DEPARTMENT 

AND 

VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL GROUP 

 SELF-INSURANCE ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 PER CURIAM 

v. Record No. 1418-96-3 NOVEMBER 26, 1996 

 

ALBERT VERNON COLEMAN 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (John P. Grove; Frank K. Friedman; Woods, 

Rogers & Hazlegrove, on briefs), for 

appellants. 

 (Gerald F. Sharp; Browning, Lamie & Sharp, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 Town of Lebanon Police Department and its insurer 

(hereinafter collectively referred to as "employer") contend that 

the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that 

employer's evidence failed to rebut the statutory presumption 

that Albert Vernon Coleman's heart disease was occupational. 

Code § 65.2-402(B). Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of 

the parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. 

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's decision. Rule 

5A:27. 

 Coleman worked as a police officer for the Town of Lebanon 

for eight years. On June 30, 1995, he sought treatment at the 

Russell County Medical Center emergency room, complaining of 

 

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

designated for publication. 
 2 

chest pains, pain radiating down both arms, nausea, and 

dizziness. Dr. Omar Hallack, the attending physician, diagnosed 

a myocardial infarction. On July 6, 1995, Dr. Clair Hixson 

examined Coleman, diagnosed a non-Q wave myocardial infarction, 

and recommended that Coleman undergo left heart catheterization. 

 On July 7, 1995, Dr. Thomas Bulle, a cardiac surgeon, performed 

the procedure. 

 Coleman's medical history indicated that he smoked one and 

one-half packs of cigarettes per day, had an elevated cholesterol 

level, and had a family history of hypertension and diabetes. 

Dr. Bulle testified that the risk factors for coronary artery 

disease include smoking, hypertension, abnormalities of lipid 

cholesterol in the bloodstream, diabetes, family history of 

premature heart disease, and male gender. However, Dr. Bulle 

stated that he could not pinpoint the exact cause of Coleman's 

heart attack. Dr. Bulle admitted that a correlation exists 

between stressful life events, including stressful work, and the 

occurrence of a coronary event. Dr. Bulle testified that he 

"certainly couldn't say that [Coleman's occupation] didn't cause 

[his heart attack]." 

 Code § 65.2-402 provides that "heart disease . . . resulting 

in total or partial disability of [a police officer] . . . shall 

be presumed to be [an] occupational disease[], suffered in the 

line of duty, . . . unless such presumption is overcome by a 

preponderance of competent evidence to the contrary." Thus, to 
 3 

rebut the presumption, an employer must establish by competent 

medical evidence a non-work-related cause of the employee's heart 

disease. City of Norfolk v. Lillard, 15 Va. App. 424, 430, 424 

S.E.2d 243, 246-47 (1992). Unless we can say as a matter of law 

that employer's evidence sustained its burden of proof, the 

commission's findings are binding and conclusive upon us. Tomko 

v. Michael's Plastering Co., 210 Va. 697, 699, 173 S.E.2d 833, 

835 (1970). 

 In holding that employer failed to rebut the presumption, 

the commission found that employer failed to exclude job-related 

stress as a possible contributing cause of Coleman's heart 

disease. Although Dr. Bulle opined that various risk factors 

contributed to the development of Coleman's coronary artery 

disease, Dr. Bulle did not exclude occupational stress as a 

contributing cause of Coleman's heart attack. "[T]he showing of 

'risk factors' alone does not rebut the statutory presumption 

and does not establish competent medical evidence of a 

non-work-related cause of the disabling disease." Lillard, 15 

Va. App. at 429, 424 S.E.2d at 246. No medical evidence proved 

either that a non-work-related factor caused Coleman's heart 

attack or that work-related stress was not a contributing cause 

of his disability. 

 Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision. 

 Affirmed.