COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton 

WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA 

 TRANSIT AUTHORITY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 1251-97-4 PER CURIAM 

 OCTOBER 7, 1997 

VERNON X. McNEIL 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Robert C. Baker, Jr.; Mell, Brownell & 

Baker, on brief), for appellant. 

 (William S. Sands, Jr.; Bruce M. Bender; 

Duncan & Hopkins; Van Grack, Axelson & 

Williamowsky, on brief), for appellee. 

 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (employer) 

contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) 

erred in finding that employer failed to prove that Vernon X. 

McNeil (claimant): (1) unjustifiably refused to cooperate with 

vocational rehabilitation; and (2) sabotaged three job 

interviews. 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. 

 In order to obtain relief pursuant to Code § 65.2-603(B), 

employer bore the initial burden of proving that the job leads it 

provided to claimant were appropriate to claimant's residual work 

 

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

designated for publication. 
 2 

capacity. Thus, where prior medical approval is not secured for 

a prospective job, the employer must demonstrate that the job 

"obviously" fits within the limitations provided by the 

claimant's physician. See Talley v. Goodwin Brothers, 224 Va. 

48, 52, 294 S.E.2d 818, 820-21 (1982). 

 In denying employer's application, the commission found as 

follows: 

 [Gabriel] Hubbard, [who began working with 

and conducting a job search for claimant in 

December 1995,] testified that she made 

preliminary calls to the employers selected 

for interviews to insure that the residual 

capacity of the claimant satisfied the 

potential employer's work requirements. We 

find that testimony was not persuasive, nor 

was it credible. The totality of Hubbard's 

testimony shows that she did not make that 

effort, because she could not identify at the 

evidentiary hearing the particulars of the 

job duties for any position, but had only a 

general idea of the work requirements that 

could have been discerned from the job title 

alone. Significantly, Hubbard testified that 

she learned only at the interview with 

Brown's Nissan that the position was 

mistakenly advertised a second time and that 

the position had been filled. If she had 

contacted the employer after the first 

advertisement had run, there would be no 

reason to testify about a second 

advertisement. Because she would have 

learned, if she had prescreened the job 

requirements with the employer after the 

second advertisement had run, that there was 

no available position, we conclude that she 

made no such preliminary screening. We find 

that her testimony showing unfamiliarity with 

the specific duties of the jobs to which she 

directed the claimant impeaches her testimony 

as to prescreening. 

 It is well settled that credibility determinations are 
 3 

within the fact finder's exclusive purview. See Goodyear Tire & 

Rubber Co. v. Pierce, 5 Va. App. 374, 381, 363 S.E.2d 433, 437 

(1987). Based upon Hubbard's inability to recall the specific 

job requirements of the prospective jobs, the commission was 

entitled to reject her testimony that she prescreened the jobs to 

insure that they were compatible with claimant's residual 

capacity. Absent evidence of medical approval for the job leads 

or that the prospective job requirements "obviously" fit within 

claimant's residual capacity, we cannot find as a matter of law 

that employer's evidence sustained its burden of proving that 

claimant unjustifiably refused vocational rehabilitation 

services. 

 Because our holding on the first question presented by 

employer disposes of this appeal, we need not separately address 

employer's second question presented. 

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

 Affirmed.