STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED 

February 20, 2013
 

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
 

AMANDA D. CHAMBERS, SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

OF WEST VIRGINIA 

Claimant Below, Petitioner 

vs.) No. 11-0885 (BOR Appeal No. 2045311) 

(Claim No. 2009075580) 

WEST VIRGINIA OFFICE OF 

INSURANCE COMMISSIONER 

Commissioner Below, Respondent 

and 

GENESIS HEALTHCARE CORPORATION, 

Employer Below, Respondent 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Amanda D. Chambers, by Reginald Henry, her attorney, appeals the decision 

of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. Genesis Healthcare Corporation, 

by Gary Nickerson, its attorney, filed a timely response. 

This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated May 5, 2011, in which 

the Board affirmed a November 18, 2010, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of 

Judges. In its Order, the Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s October 19, 2009, 

November 19, 2009, and February 9, 2010, Orders denying a request for an additional 

compensable component, denying a request for a surgical procedure, and affirming the closure of 

the claim for temporary total disability benefits. 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 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Procedure. 

Ms. Chambers was working for Genesis Healthcare Corporation as a certified nursing 

assistant when she hurt her lower back on January 22, 2009. On October 19, 2009, the claims 

administrator denied a request for authorization of an anterior lumbar spinal fusion and posterior 

lumbar spinal fusion at L5-S1. On November 19, 2009, the claims administrator denied a request 

to add displaced intervertebral disc with myelopathy as a compensable component in the claim. 

The claims administrator closed the claim for temporary total disability benefits on February 9, 

2010. 

The Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s Orders, and held that the 

preponderance of the evidence did not establish that the requested surgery was related to the 

claim, nor did the evidence establish that the requested additional compensable component was 

related to the compensable injury. The Office of Judges also held that the claim was properly 

closed for temporary total disability benefits. Ms. Chambers disagrees with these findings and 

asserts that the evidence supports authorizing the surgery and additional compensable 

component. She also argues that she is entitled to additional temporary total disability benefits. 

Genesis Healthcare maintains that it was correct to affirm the claims administrator’s Orders. 

The Office of Judges concluded that the medical evidence did not establish that displaced 

intervertebral disc with myelopathy was a result of Ms. Chambers’s employment. It noted the 

evidence did not explain how the condition was related to the compensable injury in the claim. 

Further, the Office of Judges held that the spinal fusion was not medically related to the 

compensable injury. It noted that the evidence did not indicate the relationship between the 

procedure and the compensable injury, and that the treating physician along with an independent 

evaluator found that Ms. Chambers should not have the procedure. Finally, the Office of Judges 

concluded that the closure of the claim for temporary total disability benefits was proper. Ms. 

Chambers was found to be at maximum medical improvement for the compensable injury, thus 

the claim was closed for temporary total disability benefits under West Virginia Code § 23-4­

7a(e) (2003). The Office of Judges also noted that the record was not clear when Ms. Chambers 

actually received temporary total disability benefits. The Board of Review reached the same 

reasoned conclusions in its May 5, 2011, Order. 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: February 20, 2013 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

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 

3