COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Humphreys and Retired Judge Duff*

TRAVCORPS AND 

 HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY COMPANY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION**

v. Record No. 1897-01-4 PER CURIAM 

 NOVEMBER 13, 2001 

FAUSTINE I. COOPER 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Roger L. Williams; Lauren M. Ebersole; 

Williams & Lynch, on brief), for appellants. 

 (Gregory P. Perigard; Burgess, Locklin, 

Kernbach & Perigard, PLLC, on brief), for 

appellee. 

 TravCorps and its insurer (hereinafter referred to as 

"employer") contend that the Workers' Compensation Commission 

erred in finding that Faustine I. Cooper proved that she 

adequately marketed her residual work capacity after 

November 18, 2000. 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. See

Rule 5A:27. 

 *

 Retired Judge Charles H. Duff took part in the 

consideration of this case by designation pursuant to Code 

§ 17.1-400(D). 

** Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

 "The determination of whether a partially disabled employee 

has adequately marketed [her] residual work capacity lies within 

the fact finding judgment of the commission." Wall Street Deli, 

Inc. v. O'Brien, 32 Va. App. 217, 220-221, 527 S.E.2d 451, 453 

(2000). Factual findings made by the commission will be upheld 

on appeal if supported by credible evidence. See James v. 

Capitol Steel Constr. Co., 8 Va. App. 512, 515, 382 S.E.2d 487, 

488 (1989). 

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

to the prevailing party below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. 

Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). In 

ruling that Cooper proved that she adequately marketed her 

residual work capacity beginning November 18, 2000, the 

commission found as follows: 

[Cooper] showed that she moved to California 

. . . [on November 18, 2000], and 

immediately began seeking employment. She 

presented evidence of 21 different jobs for 

which she made personal contacts, and she 

also stated that she applied at the 

California employment commission and made 16 

contacts with potential employers through 

that commission, for which she supplied 

contact information. She also searched the 

want-ads and inquired at places posting 

help-wanted signs. 

 On appeal, employer challenges the reliability of Cooper's 

job search and her credibility. As fact finder, the commission, 

weighed Cooper's evidence and accepted her uncontradicted 

testimony and documentary evidence regarding her marketing 
- 3 - 

efforts after November 18, 2000. It is well settled that 

credibility determinations are within the fact finder's 

exclusive purview. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Pierce, 5 Va. 

App. 374, 381, 363 S.E.2d 433, 437 (1987). Furthermore, "[i]n 

determining whether credible evidence exists, the appellate 

court does not retry the facts, reweigh the preponderance of the 

evidence, or make its own determination of the credibility of 

the witnesses." Wagner Enters., Inc. v. Brooks, 12 Va. App. 

890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1991). 

 Because the commission's decision was based upon credible 

evidence, it will not be disturbed on appeal. Accordingly, we 

affirm the commission's decision. 

Affirmed.