STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED 

April 19, 2013
 

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
 

DIANA L. CURTIS, SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

OF WEST VIRGINIA 

Claimant Below, Petitioner 

vs.) No. 11-1013 (BOR Appeal No. 2045319) 

(Claim No. 201017605) 

WEST VIRGINIA OFFICE OF 

INSURANCE COMMISSIONER 

Commissioner Below, Respondent 

and 

HOMER LAUGHLIN CHINA CO., 

Employer Below, Respondent 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Diana L. Curtis, by Patrick K. Maroney, her attorney, appeals the decision of 

the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. Homer Laughlin China Co., by 

Lucinda Fluharty, its attorney, filed a timely response. 

This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated June 9, 2011, in which 

the Board affirmed a November 3, 2011, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges. 

In its Order, the Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s January 25, 2010, order. 

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. 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ms. Curtis was working at The Homer Laughlin China Company as a brusher/feeder on 

September 21, 2009, when she experienced pain and pressure in her lower abdominal area while 

pulling boards, turning the table, and lifting bungs of ware. Ms. Curtis had previously 

complained of a dropped bladder to a plant R.N. In his October 15, 2009, report, Dr. Parulkar 

reported that Ms. Curtis told him that she had been ongoing symptoms for a year with it getting 

worse the last three months. 

In reaching the decision to affirm the claims administrator’s order, the Office of Judges 

found that Ms. Curtis’s work activities were not so unique as to have caused her condition and 

that Ms. Curtis had a disease of the general population that did not result from her employment. 

The Board of Review reached the same reasoned conclusion as the Office of Judges in its 

decision of June 9, 2011. We agree with the reasoning and conclusions of the Board of Review. 

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: April 19, 2013 

CONCURRED IN BY: 

Chief Justice Brent D. Benjamin 

Justice Robin J. Davis 

Justice Margaret L. Workman 

Justice Allen H. Loughry II 

DISSENTING: 

Justice Menis E. Ketchum 

2