STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED 

March 27, 2015 

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK 

RYAN PRICE, SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS 

OF WEST VIRGINIA 

Claimant Below, Petitioner 

vs.) No. 14-0615 (BOR Appeal No. 2048994) 

(Claim No. 2014003894) 

SAUNDERS STAFFING, INC., 

Employer Below, Respondent 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Ryan Price, by John H. Shumate Jr., his attorney, appeals the decision of the 

West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. Saunders Staffing, Inc., by Jillian L. 

Moore, its attorney, filed a timely response. 

This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated May 28, 2014, in which 

the Board affirmed a November 19, 2013, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of 

Judges. In its Order, the Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s August 9, 2013, 

decision rejecting the claim. The Court has carefully reviewed the records, written arguments, 

and appendices contained in the briefs, and the case is mature for consideration. 

This Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The facts and legal 

arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided 

by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record 

presented, the Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these 

reasons, a memorandum decision is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. 

Mr. Price, a laborer, alleges that he was injured on August 1, 2013, while loading wet 

tents onto a truck. August 2, 2013, treatment notes from Beckley ARH Hospital’s Emergency 

Room indicate that that he reported lower back pain with radiation down the right leg. He stated 

he was throwing wet tents at work when the pain started suddenly approximately a day prior. He 

was diagnosed with spinal stenosis and a herniated disc. 

At the time of his alleged injury, Mr. Price was assigned to work for Granny’s Alliance. 

His supervisor at that time, Jason Heisey, completed an accident report for the alleged injury. He 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

stated that he spoke to three witnesses, and they all reported that they did not notice anything 

wrong with Mr. Price on the day of the alleged injury and that he was “goofing off” later that 

day. Mr. Heisey stated that he worked with Mr. Price on the day of the alleged injury and did not 

notice anything wrong. Mr. Price worked all day and was jumping around in the truck at the end 

of his shift. He did not mention an injury or pain that day. 

Saunders Staffing, Inc., introduced several affidavits from co-workers who were present 

on the day of the alleged injury. Jason Heisey asserted that on the day of the alleged injury, his 

team was loading small tents into a truck. The tents weighed five to ten pounds and though it was 

raining, they were covered by a tarp until they were loaded. His crew alternated loading and 

stacking and took numerous breaks. At the end of his shift, Mr. Price was laughing, jumping up 

and down in the truck, and attempting to block tents from entering the truck. He appeared to be 

in no physical distress and never informed Mr. Heisey that he was in pain. Mr. Price did not 

report to work the following day. Due to his absence and his behavior the previous day, Mr. 

Heisey contacted Saunders Staffing, Inc., and requested that his assignment end. 

Heather Meadows, who worked for Saunders Staffing, Inc., when Mr. Price alleges his 

injury occurred, asserted in an affidavit that she was notified on August 2, 2013, by Jason Heisey 

that he wished to have Mr. Price’s contract ended. Mr. Heisey stated that Mr. Price was engaging 

in more horseplay than work and had not reported to work that day. Ms. Meadows called Mr. 

Price that same day to inform him that his assignment was terminated and Saunders Staffing Inc., 

had no other positions for him. After he was informed that he was no longer needed, Mr. Price 

stated that he injured his back the previous day. 

Thomas Atwood, George Burgess, and Donnie Broyles, all stated in affidavits that they 

worked with Mr. Price on the day of the alleged accident. They all asserted that the tents they 

were loading weighted between five and ten pounds. None of them saw Mr. Price sustain an 

injury. They all stated that at the end of the shift, Mr. Price was laughing, jumping around, and 

roughhousing with several other employees with no sign of injury. They all affirmed that Mr. 

Price did not inform anyone on the shift that he was injured. 

Mr. Price testified in a hearing before the Office of Judges on October 29, 2013. He 

asserted that he was lifting and stacking wet tents that weighed thirty to forty pounds on the day 

that he was injured. He stated that his back started to hurt while he was loading tents and 

continued to worsen the longer he worked. That same day, he asserted that he told his supervisor, 

Jason Heisey, that his back hurt. He woke up the next morning with extreme back pain and 

called in to inform his supervisor that he would not be at work that day. He denied laughing, 

joking, and engaging in horseplay at the end of his shift. He asserted that he attempted to contact 

Ms. Meadows on August 2, 2013, and left a message for her. He was on his way to the hospital 

when she called him to inform him that he was no longer needed. 

The claims administrator rejected the claim on August 9, 2013. The Office of Judges 

affirmed the decision in its November 19, 2013, Order. It found that while Mr. Price’s testimony 

was credible, there was a complete lack of corroboration given that he worked in a group of ten 

people. Not only did he fail to produce a corroborating witness, Saunders Staffing, Inc., 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

introduced affidavits that directly refuted his allegation of a work-related injury. Also, he failed 

to report the incident in writing to his employer. The Office of Judges stated that West Virginia 

Code § 23-4-1g (2003), provides that failure to immediately give notice to the employer that an 

injury has occurred weighs against a finding of compensability. The Office of Judges determined 

that Saunders Staffing, Inc., denied receiving notice of an injury until after Mr. Price’s work 

assignment was terminated. It was found that given the circumstances surrounding the alleged 

injury, corroboration of Mr. Price’s testimony should have been readily available. However, the 

affidavits of record support Saunders Staffing Inc.’s, position, including Mr. Heisey’s assertion 

that Mr. Price engaged in horseplay, which resulted in his termination. The Board of Review 

adopted the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Office of Judges and affirmed its 

Order on May 28, 2014. 

On appeal, Mr. Price argues that he suffered a definite, isolated, fortuitous occurrence in 

the course of his employment, and the medical evidence clearly shows that he sustained a low 

back strain. He asserts that the Office of Judges found his testimony to be credible, and he 

reported the injury to Saunders Staffing, Inc., within two days. Saunders Staffing, Inc., argues 

that Mr. Price originally reported an isolated event and then later testified that his pain arose 

gradually as he worked. It argues that his version of the events on the date of injury are 

uncorroborated, and his complaints of injury arose after he was informed that his assignment was 

terminated. 

After review, we agree with the reasoning of the Office of Judges and the conclusions of 

the Board of Review. The evidence of record indicates that Mr. Price did not sustain a workrelated injury as he asserts. Multiple affidavits state that he did not appear to be injured, did not 

report an injury, and engaged in horseplay at the end of his shift. It is also significant that he did 

not report a work-related injury until after he was informed that his position had been terminated 

due to his behavior. West Virginia Code § 23-4-1c(a)(2)(B) (2009) provides that, for the purpose 

of determining compensability, the claims administrator shall consider “[w]hether the claimant 

received notice within sixty days of the filing that his or her employment position was to be 

eliminated.” 

For the foregoing reasons, we find that the decision of the Board of Review is not in clear 

violation of any constitutional or statutory provision, nor is it clearly the result of erroneous 

conclusions of law, nor is it based upon a material misstatement or mischaracterization of the 

evidentiary record. Therefore, the decision of the Board of Review is affirmed. 

Affirmed. 

ISSUED: March 27, 2015 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

CONCURRED IN BY: 

Chief Justice Margaret L. Workman 

Justice Robin J. Davis 

Justice Brent D. Benjamin 

Justice Allen H. Loughry II 

DISSENTING: 

Justice Menis E. Ketchum 

4