STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS 

FILED 

ARMSTRONG HARDWOOD FLOORING COMPANY, June 22, 2016 

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK Employer Below, Petitioner SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS 

OF WEST VIRGINIA 

vs.) No. 15-0623 (BOR Appeal No. 2049973) 

(Claim No. 2013020317) 

LESA G. RICHMOND, 

Claimant Below, Respondent 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Armstrong Hardwood Flooring Company, by Patricia E. McEnteer, its 

attorney, appeals the decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. 

Lesa G. Richmond, by Robert L. Stultz, her attorney, filed a timely response. 

This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated May 28, 2015, in which 

the Board reversed the October 27, 2014, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges 

and found the claim compensable for lateral epicondylitis. In its Order, the Office of Judges 

affirmed the claims administrator’s December 19, 2013, decision to deny the request to add 

lateral epicondylitis as a compensable component of the claim. 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. 

Ms. Richmond, a nester for Armstrong Hardwood Flooring Company, filed a claim on 

October 2, 2012, alleging that she developed pain, discomfort, numbness, tingling, and soreness 

in her arms from working as a nester. Timothy Peasak, D.O., signed the form and diagnosed pain 

in the limb and carpal tunnel syndrome resulting from an occupational injury. Medical records 

from Dr. Peasak on October 3, 2012, showed that Ms. Richmond was examined for pain in her 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

right arm that had been occurring for one month. The pain started at the right shoulder and 

radiated into the elbow and wrist. Ms. Richmond also reported numbness and tingling in her 

right hand while working. Ms. Richmond’s pain was worse during and after work. There was no 

known injury. Physical examination revealed full flexion and extension in both elbows. There 

was no pain with resisted rotation of the forearm. No pain was elicited on palpation and 

percussion of the cubital tunnel. There was no swelling or erythema noted in the elbow. Dr. 

Peasak diagnosed Ms. Richmond with pain in the limb and carpal tunnel syndrome. Ms. 

Richmond was advised to rest her arms for four days and take Motrin. If it did not improve with 

rest, a nerve conduction study would be appropriate. 

On November 6, 2012, Ms. Richmond was evaluated by Mujib Rahman, M.D., and 

reported pain, numbness, and weakness in both arms for over a year. The pain had increased over 

the last several months. Ms. Richmond complained of right shoulder pain as well as numbness 

and tingling in the fingers of her right hand. She also had pain and numbness in the left hand, as 

well as some neck pain and intermittent mild headaches. Sensory examination revealed 

diminished sensation along the median nerve distribution. Dr. Rahman’s diagnoses were carpal 

tunnel syndrome and tension headaches. Dr. Rahman recommended a nerve conduction study of 

her upper extremities. A nerve conduction study performed the next day revealed normal 

findings with no evidence of carpal tunnel syndrome, ulnar neuropathy, polyneuropathy, or 

cervical radiculopathy. 

Bill Hennessey, M.D., performed an independent medical evaluation on May 9, 2013, in 

which he opined that there was no direct causal link between Ms. Richmond’s employment and 

the onset of her hand and elbow symptoms. He noted that her symptoms did not manifest until 

her thirteenth year of employment. He also noted that despite being off work for four months, 

Ms. Richmond complained that her right elbow pain was just as severe as it had been when she 

was working. Dr. Hennessey opined that if her right elbow pain was truly work-related, it would 

have gone away after not working for four months. He further noted that she underwent 

electrodiagnostic testing performed by Dr. Rahman which revealed normal findings. Despite the 

normal nerve conduction study, Richard Topping, M.D., performed bilateral carpal tunnel 

surgery in February and March of 2013. Dr. Hennessey performed electrodiagnostic testing and 

an examination. He found no diagnosis and noted that every test was normal. He did not believe 

the elbow symptoms were caused by her work. He opined that she was at maximum medical 

improvement. The claims administrator denied the request to add lateral epicondylitis as a 

compensable component of the claim on December 19, 2013. 

On February 11, 2014, Prasadarao Mukkamala, M.D., performed an independent medical 

evaluation in which he opined that there was no evidence of lateral epicondylitis and that even if 

the condition was present, it would not be due to her occupational activities. Physical 

examination revealed normal range of motion in all joints of both upper extremities, including 

the elbow. Ms. Richmond had tenderness over the right lateral epicondyle. Motor and sensory 

examination was normal, and there was no evidence of any neurological or vascular deficits in 

the upper extremities. Dr. Mukkamala found Ms. Richmond to have non-specific symptoms in 

both upper extremities that had mostly resolved. The claimant had reached maximum medical 

improvement. 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On March 27, 2014, Dr. Topping testified in a hearing before the Office of Judges that he 

is an orthopedic surgeon who treated Ms. Richmond for carpal tunnel syndrome and lateral and 

medial epicondylitis. Ms. Richmond worked as a nester which required repetitive motion. Ms. 

Richmond began to notice tingling in her hands and elbow pain in September of 2012. Dr. 

Topping had performed surgery on Ms. Richmond for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and 

lateral and medial epicondylitis. Dr. Topping had recently seen Ms. Richmond for post-operative 

follow-up, and she was doing quite well. Dr. Topping explained that lateral epicondylitis is a 

chronic tendinopathy issue that is related to repeated activities, such as playing tennis or working 

as a nester. Dr. Topping could not recall obtaining any information about Ms. Richmond’s 

recreational or non-occupational activities. He stated that typically epicondylitis will manifest 

within several months of the repetitive-use activity. However, some people have it for years and 

become more susceptible as they age. Although most of the time an individual’s symptoms 

would be expected to improve if they were removed from the repetitive activity, this is not 

always the case. Dr. Topping opined to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that Ms. 

Richmond’s right lateral epicondylitis was related to her employment as a nester. 

The Office of Judges found that Ms. Richmond failed to establish that she suffered from 

lateral epicondylitis or that she developed it in the course of and as a result of her employment. 

The Office of Judges found that Dr. Topping was the only physician of record to diagnose 

lateral epicondylitis. After her injury, she was seen by Dr. Peasak and Dr. Rahman, and neither 

physician found that she suffered from lateral epicondylitis. Thereafter, she had independent 

medical evaluations by both Dr. Mukkamala and Dr. Hennessey. Neither physician found 

evidence of lateral epicondylitis. Based on the many different reports finding no lateral 

epicondylitis, the Office of Judges found that Ms. Richmond failed to meet her burden of proof 

to show that the condition developed in the course of and as a result of her employment. 

The Board of Review adopted the findings of the Office of Judges and reversed its Order. 

The Board of Review noted that the claim was held compensable for bilateral carpal tunnel 

syndrome. The Board of Review examined Ms. Richmond’s job duties. As a nester she was 

required to apply putty to boards and move them on a frequent basis. According to the Board of 

Review it was heavy work. The Board of Review also found her testimony persuasive. During 

her thirteen years of work, she had aches and pains in her wrists and elbows. Then her condition 

continuously worsened over a period of a couple of months. Dr. Topping began treating her in 

December of 2012 and he performed surgery on her elbow on March 5, 2014. He requested that 

lateral epicondylitis be added as a compensable component of the claim. He explained the 

relationship of the condition to Ms. Richmond’s work noting it was a repetitive use injury and 

her work duty was repetitive. The Board of Review found that Dr. Topping believed, within a 

reasonable degree of medical certainty, that her lateral epicondylitis was related to her work as a 

nester. After review, we agree with the Board of Review. The weight of the evidence supports 

the finding that Ms. Richmond developed lateral epicondylitis in the course of and as a result of 

her employment. 

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 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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: June 22, 2016 

CONCURRED IN BY: 

Chief Justice Menis E. Ketchum 

Justice Robin J. Davis 

Justice Brent D. Benjamin 

Justice Margaret L. Workman 

Justice Allen H. Loughry II 

4