1 

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA

NATHANIEL R. WAMSLEY, 

Claimant Below, Petitioner 

vs.) No. 22-ICA-205 (JCN: 2022005199) 

WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Employer Below, Respondent 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Nathaniel Wamsley appeals the September 27, 2022, order of the 

Workers’ Compensation Board of Review (“Board”). Respondent West Virginia Division 

of Natural Resources (“DNR”) filed a timely response.1 Petitioner did not file a reply. The 

issue on appeal is whether the Board erred in affirming the claim administrator’s order 

rejecting the claim. 

This Court has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to West Virginia Code § 51-

11-4 (2022). After considering the parties’ arguments, the record on appeal, and the 

applicable law, this Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For 

these reasons, a memorandum decision affirming the Board’s order is appropriate under 

Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

Mr. Wamsley did not sign or date the Employees’ and Physicians’ Report of 

Occupational Injury or Disease (“WC-1 form”) that he filed for this claim. The employee’s 

section of the form reported that he received a back and hip injury on September 13, 2021, 

after he bent over and a supervisor pulled him up. Mr. Wamsley was seen in the emergency 

department at Davis Medical Center on September 13, 2021, where John Logar, M.D., 

examined him and completed the physician’s section of the WC-1 form, indicating that Mr. 

Wamsley suffered strains to his low back and wrists as the result of an occupational injury. 

According to Dr. Logar’s treatment notes, Mr. Wamsley reported low back pain and 

bilateral wrist pain which began on the same day with a gradual onset. Dr. Logar reported 

that Mr. Wamsley claimed that he was lifting heavy objects at work. X-rays of Mr. 

Wamsley’s pelvis, lumbosacral spine, and both wrists, revealed no abnormality. 

On September 13, 2021, Kenneth Wilson, who was listed on the WC-1 form as Mr. 

Wamsley’s supervisor, completed an incident report in which he explained that Mr. 

Wamsley injured his back while picking up dead fish at the fish hatchery. In other incident 

1 Petitioner is represented by J. Thomas Greene, Jr., Esq. and T. Colin Greene, Esq. 

Respondent is represented by Steven K. Wellman, Esq. and James W. Heslep, Esq. 

FILED

February 6, 2023

EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF WEST VIRGINIA
2

reports dated September 13, 2021, coworkers David Lombardi, Ryan Coffman, Peyton 

Mullenax, and Jason Shahan described what they witnessed on the date of the alleged 

injury. In general, the coworkers reported that they witnessed Mr. Wamsley picking up 

dead fish, then walking away, sitting down, then lying down in the roadway. In one report, 

an unidentified individual explained that as he and “Wilson” assisted Mr. Wamsley to his 

feet, Mr. Wamsley yelled that he was now in more pain.

On September 22, 2021, Deborah Ransbottom, NP, treated Mr. Wamsley for 

injuries to his thoracic spine, hips, and wrists. Mr. Wamsley alleged that he sat down after 

experiencing popping in his back while raking dead fish at work. According to Nurse 

Ransbottom, Mr. Wamsley reported that his “boss ‘roughed him up’ by getting his right 

wrist and pulling him to a standing position” resulting in bruises on his left buttock and 

right hip. In her notes, Nurse Ransbottom indicated that the bruising she observed was not 

consistent with Mr. Wamsley’s story.

By order dated September 29, 2021, the claim administrator rejected Mr. Wamsley’s 

workers’ compensation claim because there were sufficient inconsistencies and 

contradictions to conclude that he was not injured in the course of and as a result of his 

employment. Mr. Wamsley protested the order. 

Mr. Wamsley testified at a deposition on February 21, 2022, that on September 13, 

2021, while he was performing his work for DNR at a fish hatchery, he bent over to pick 

up dead fish and felt a spasm or tightness in his mid-back, so he walked away, sat down, 

and then laid down. According to his testimony, Mr. Wamsley was scooping up the fish 

individually as he kept count of them. The scoop was not heavy and only weighed a few 

pounds even when combined with a fish. Mr. Wamsley contended that his supervisor,

Kenneth Wilson, and a coworker, David Lombardi, jerked him up from the ground and 

injured his right hip, right wrist, and back. In his testimony, Mr. Wamsley contended that 

he did not have any back or hip problems until the injury occurred. On cross-examination, 

Mr. Wamsley admitted that his workplace had given him written warnings and he was 

placed on a performance improvement plan at work after the injury. When asked about a 

performance improvement plan dated September 1, 2021, Mr. Wamsley contended that it 

was not presented to him until he returned to work following the injury.

On September 27, 2022, the Board affirmed the claim administrator’s order dated 

September 29, 2021. The Board determined that medical evidence contradicted Mr. 

Wamsley’s testimony that he did not have prior problems in his back and hip. Also, the 

Board noted that Nurse Ransbottom did not find Mr. Wamsley’s bruising to be consistent 

with his story. The Board found too many discrepancies in the evidence presented to 
3

support the credibility of Mr. Wamsley’s application and the compensability of the claim.

2

It is from the Board’s order that Mr. Wamsley now appeals.

Our standard of review is set forth in West Virginia Code § 23-5-12a(b) (2022), in 

part, as follows:

The Intermediate Court of Appeals may affirm the order or decision of the 

Workers’ Compensation Board of Review or remand the case for further 

proceedings. It shall reverse, vacate, or modify the order or decision of the 

Workers’ Compensation Board of Review, if the substantial rights of the 

petitioner or petitioners have been prejudiced because the Board of Review’s 

findings are:

(1) In violation of statutory provisions;

(2) In excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the Board of Review;

(3) Made upon unlawful procedures;

(4) Affected by other error of law;

(5) Clearly wrong in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence 

on the whole record; or

(6) Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly 

unwarranted exercise of discretion.

Duff v. Kanawha Cnty. Comm’n, No. 22-ICA-10, ____ W. Va. ____, ____, ____ S.E. 2d 

____, _____, 2022 WL 17546598, at *4 (Ct. App. Dec. 9, 2022).

On appeal, Mr. Wamsley argues that the Board’s order affirming the rejection of the 

claim was clearly wrong in light of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the 

whole record.3 Mr. Wamsley asserts that he sustained injuries to his low back, thoracic 

region, wrists, and hips in the course of and resulting from his employment with DNR on 

September 13, 2021. Initially, Mr. Wamsley alleges that his back “popped” while he was 

removing dead fish from troughs at a DNR fish hatchery. Then, Mr. Wamsley contends 

that he sat down to ease his pain and that coworkers lifted him too quickly, causing him 

additional pain in his hip and wrists. Mr. Wamsley argues that Nurse Ransbottom took him 

off work and diagnosed myalgia and low back pain, and that the claim administrator

wrongly rejected his claim. Acknowledging that there could be some factual variations in 

the record about the mechanism of injury, Mr. Wamsley contends that all of his direct 

statements about the injury are “quite similar,” whereas any discrepancies were caused by

2 The Board’s order of September 27, 2022, failed to report the reason or basis given 

by the claim administrator to explain why the claim was rejected. West Virginia Code § 

23-5-1a (2022) requires the claim administrator’s orders to include the basis for its actions. 

We strongly urge the Board to provide this information in its future decisions.

3 Mr. Wamsley does not set out a specific assignment of error in his brief.
4

medical providers who interpreted the events. Finally, Mr. Wamsley asserts that he was 

working full duty on September 13, 2021, without symptoms or limitations until he 

developed pain in the course of and resulting from his employment. Mr. Wamsley notes 

that after receiving medical attention he was taken off work and referred to physical 

therapy. 

Workers’ compensation benefits are provided to employees who receive an injury 

in the course of and as a result of their covered employment pursuant to West Virginia 

Code § 23-4-1 (2021). After review, we conclude that the Board was not clearly wrong in 

its finding that Mr. Wamsley did not prove he suffered an injury in the course of and 

resulting from his employment with DNR. The discrepancies in the descriptions given by 

Mr. Wamsley regarding how the injury occurred and even the body parts alleged to have 

been injured do not support the compensability of an injury in this case. 

Accordingly, we affirm.

Affirmed.

ISSUED: February 6, 2023

CONCURRED IN BY:

Chief Judge Daniel W. Greear

Judge Charles O. Lorensen

Judge Thomas E. Scarr, not participating