COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton 

WRANGLER\VF CORPORATION 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 1634-96-3 PER CURIAM 

 NOVEMBER 12, 1996 

BONNIE MAE WOODWARD 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (J. David Griffin; Fowler, Griffin, Coyne & 

Coyne, on briefs), for appellant. 

 (Terry L. Armentrout; Armentrout & Armentrout, 

 on brief), for appellee. 

 Wrangler, Inc. ("employer") appeals from a decision of the 

Workers' Compensation Commission ("commission") awarding Bonnie 

M. Woodward ("claimant") temporary total disability benefits 

commencing April 18, 1995. Employer contends that the commission 

erred in finding that (1) claimant was totally disabled after 

April 20, 1995, and therefore, did not unjustifiably refuse 

selective employment offered to her by employer on April 20, 

1995; and (2) claimant's disability was causally related to her 

compensable April 17, 1995 injury by accident. Pursuant to Rule 

5A:21(b), claimant raises the additional question of whether the 

commission erred in finding that employer offered claimant a 

valid panel of physicians from which to choose a treating 

physician. Finding no error, we affirm the commission's 

decision. 

 

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

designated for publication. 
 2 

 I. 

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

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

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

Factual findings made by the commission will be upheld on appeal 

if supported by credible evidence. James v. Capitol Steel 

Constr. Co., 8 Va. App. 512, 515, 382 S.E.2d 487, 488 (1989). 

 In awarding temporary total disability benefits to claimant 

and ruling that claimant was not obligated to accept light-duty 

employment offered to her by employer on April 20, 1995, the 

commission found as follows: 

 The medical evidence indicates that Dr. 

[Fang] Horng took the claimant out of work 

from April 18 until April 25, 1995, when he 

released her to light duty. In a subsequent 

note of April 24, 1995, he indicated that she 

would be totally disabled from April 26, 

1995, until an MRI was performed. 

 On May 2, 1995, the claimant selected 

Dr. [James W.] Feeley as her treating 

physician, who referred her to Dr. [Frederick 

L.] Fox. Based on the medical evidence, she 

is entitled to temporary total disability 

benefits until May 10, 1995, when she was 

released to light duty [by Dr. Fox]. 

Although we find the treatment rendered by 

Drs. Fox and Feeley to be unauthorized, we 

accept their opinions regarding disability to 

be persuasive. 

 The medical records and opinions of Drs. Horng, Feeley, and 

Fox provide credible evidence to support the commission's 

decision. As fact finder, the commission was entitled to give 

little weight to the April 18, 1995 report of Robin Rider, a 

certified nurse practitioner employed by Dr. G. Gregory Ross. In 
 3 

the report, Rider released claimant to return to light-duty work 

on April 20, 1995. No evidence indicated whether Dr. Ross 

approved of this release. "Medical evidence is not necessarily 

conclusive, but is subject to the commission's consideration and 

weighing." Hungerford Mechanical Corp. v. Hobson, 11 Va. App. 

675, 677, 401 S.E.2d 213, 215 (1991). Moreover, "[t]he fact that 

there is contrary evidence in the record is of no consequence if 

there is credible evidence to support the commission's finding." 

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

32, 35 (1991). 

 II. 

 On appeal, employer argues that the commission erred in 

finding that claimant's continuing disability was causally 

related to her compensable injury by accident, rather than to her 

October 1995 hospitalization due to a prescription drug overdose. 

 Employer did not raise this issue before the commission. 

Accordingly, we will not consider it for the first time on 

appeal. Green v. Warwick Plumbing & Heating Corp., 5 Va. App. 

409, 413, 364 S.E.2d 4, 6 (1988); Rule 5A:18. 

 III. 

 Claimant's supervisors, Linda Cook and Angela Brumbeck, 

testified that, on the day after claimant's accident, they 

offered her a panel of physicians, from which she chose Dr. Ross 

as her treating physician. Claimant denied selecting Dr. Ross as 

her treating physician. Rather, she contended that employer told 
 4 

her to go to Dr. Ross. The commission accepted the testimony of 

Cook and Brumbeck. It is well settled that the determination of 

a witness' credibility is within the fact finder's exclusive 

purview. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Pierce, 5 Va. App. 374, 

381, 363 S.E.2d 433, 437 (1987). The testimony of Cook and 

Brumbeck constitutes credible evidence to support the 

commission's finding that claimant selected Dr. Ross as her 

treating physician from a panel offered to her by employer, and 

that the treatment rendered by Drs. Feeley and Fox was 

unauthorized. 

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

 Affirmed.