COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis 

Argued at Alexandria, Virginia 

STAFFORD COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE 

and 

VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL GROUP OPINION BY 

 SELF-INSURANCE ASSOCIATION JUDGE JERE M. H. WILLIS, JR. 

 APRIL 23, 1996 

v. Record No. 2275-95-4 

 

VICTOR J. DEBORD 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 

 Jennifer G. Marwitz (Ralph L. Whitt, Jr.; 

Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, on briefs), 

for appellants. 

 Michael A. Kernbach (Laurie D. Waters; Jack 

T. Burgess & Associates, P.C., on brief), for 

appellee. 

 On appeal from an award of compensation and medical expenses 

to Victor J. DeBord, Stafford County Sheriff's Office (Stafford 

County) contends that no credible evidence supports the 

commission's finding that DeBord did not unjustifiably refuse 

authorized medical treatment as required by Code § 65.2-603. We 

disagree and affirm the commission's decision. 

 On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable 

to the party prevailing below. Crisp v. Brown's Tysons Corner 

Dodge, Inc., 1 Va. App. 503, 504, 339 S.E.2d 916, 916 (1986). 

"Factual findings by the commission that are supported by 

credible evidence are conclusive and binding upon this Court on 

appeal." Southern Iron Works, Inc. v. Wallace, 16 Va. App. 131, 

134, 428 S.E.2d 32, 34 (1993). 
- 2 - 

 On April 24, 1994, DeBord sustained a compensable injury by 

accident arising out of and in the course of his employment as a 

Stafford County deputy sheriff. He suffered chest injuries, 

lacerations, and soft tissue injuries to various parts of his 

body. He was treated at Fairfax Hospital and was released on 

April 25, 1994, with instruction to seek follow-up treatment with 

his family physician. 

 DeBord's family physician, Dr. Banzon, read about the 

accident in the newspaper. On April 26, 1994, Dr. Banzon called 

DeBord and suggested that he come in for a check-up. That same 

day, Detective Jerry Tulsom hand delivered to DeBord a list of 

panel physicians and a form for him to sign acknowledging receipt 

of the list. DeBord signed the acknowledgment form, which 

states, "I have received a copy of the Panel of Physicians list 

by my supervisor at the time I reported my work-related 

injury/illness. I will select a physician, if needed, from the 

list for any necessary treatment." 

 DeBord saw Dr. Banzon on April 29, 1994 and again on May 9. 

 Prior to both visits with Dr. Banzon, DeBord notified Stafford 

County's injury coordinator and a Quick Fax Report was sent to 

the Virginia Municipal Liabilities Group (VML), the county's 

workers' compensation insurer. Neither party objected to 

DeBord's treatment by Dr. Banzon. 

 On May 12, 1994, after DeBord had returned to work, a 

representative of VML contacted DeBord concerning his treatment 
- 3 - 

by Dr. Banzon. On May 13, 1994, the carrier sent DeBord a letter 

stating that his claim was accepted as compensable and his 

emergency medical treatment would be covered. However, the 

letter advised him that because he had not sought follow-up 

treatment from a panel physician, his medical expenses and 

disability compensation would not be covered. 

 The deputy commissioner found that DeBord had not refused 

medical care from a panel physician, and that even if a refusal 

occurred, it was justified. The deputy commissioner awarded 

DeBord temporary total disability benefits from April 24, 1994 

through May 9, 1994, and the reasonable cost of authorized 

medical care. 

 On review, the full commission found no unjustified refusal 

because DeBord had not refused to see a panel physician. It 

noted that Dr. Banzon practiced with the same medical group as a 

physician on the panel, but at a different location. The 

commission noted that DeBord had notified his employer and 

insurer prior to his treatment by Dr. Banzon and that neither the 

county nor VML had objected until after DeBord's release from Dr. 

Banzon's care and return to work. 

 Citing Peninsula Transp. Dist. Comm'n. v. Gibbs, 228 Va. 

614, 324 S.E.2d 662 (1985), Stafford County contends that 

DeBord's right to compensation is barred because he unjustifiably 

refused to seek treatment by a panel physician. In Gibbs, the 

Supreme Court denied benefits because the claimant refused 
- 4 - 

treatment by a panel physician and instead sought treatment from 

her family physician. The Court held that the claimant was 

"under a duty to choose a physician from the panel." Id. at 618, 

324 S.E.2d at 664. Stafford County argues that this case is 

factually the same as Gibbs. 

Gibbs is distinguishable from the present case. In Gibbs, 

the claimant received a panel of physicians from a claims 

representative, who explained the panel to her. Her employer 

advised her that if she sought treatment from a non-panel 

physician, that treatment would be at her own expense. After 

conferring with her attorney, the claimant refused treatment by a 

panel physician. Her employer did not acquiesce in this refusal. 

 Upon his discharge from Fairfax Hospital, DeBord was 

instructed to consult his family physician. That physician, Dr. 

Banzon, contacted DeBord and arranged to see him promptly. 

Moreover, as the commission noted, Dr. Banzon was a member of the 

same medical group as a member of the panel. DeBord justifiably 

thought that he was seeking appropriate medical treatment in a 

manner designed to expedite his recovery and return to work. He 

did not perceive that another physician was needed. Informed of 

this course, neither the county's representative nor VML 

objected. Unlike the claimant in Gibbs, the claimant in this 

case at no time refused to be examined or treated by a panel 

physician. 

 Credible evidence supports the commission's finding that 
- 5 - 

DeBord did not unjustifiably refuse authorized medical treatment. 

 The decision of the commission is affirmed. 

 Affirmed.