COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Elder and Fitzpatrick 

MERCHANT'S TIRE 

AND 

FIRST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA 

v. Record No. 1880-95-1 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 PER CURIAM 

EDWIN CHARLES HOLDEN DECEMBER 27, 1995 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Robert C. Baker, Jr.; Mell, Brownell & Baker, 

 on brief), for appellants. 

 (Byron A. Adams, on brief), for appellee. 

 Merchant's Tire and its insurer (collectively referred to as 

employer) appeal a decision of the Workers' Compensation 

Commission (commission) awarding benefits to Edwin C. Holden 

(claimant). Employer contends that the commission erred in 

finding that claimant sustained an injury by accident arising out 

of and in the course of his employment on September 5, 1994. 

Specifically, employer argues that the commission erred in 

reversing the deputy commissioner's credibility determination and 

in not following this Court's holding in Pence Nissan Oldsmobile 

v. Oliver, 20 Va. App. 314, 456 S.E.2d 541 (1995). Finding no 

error, we affirm the commission's decision. 

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

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

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
 2 

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

Factual findings made by the commission will be upheld on appeal 

if supported by credible evidence. James v. Capitol Steel 

Constr. Co., 8 Va. App. 512, 515, 382 S.E.2d 487, 488 (1989). 

 On September 5, 1994, claimant worked for employer as a 

general service mechanic. He testified that, on that date, he 

felt a sharp pain in his lower back while twisting his body and 

lifting an automobile tire from a stand-up tire machine. The 

pain was so severe that it caused him to drop the tire and drop 

to his knees. Claimant was not able to complete his work shift 

due to increasing back pain. The next day claimant told Jay 

Myers, the assistant store manager, about the incident and his 

injury. Thereafter, claimant reported to Sentara Hampton General 

Hospital's emergency room for treatment. The emergency room 

attending physician reported a history of lifting at work the 

previous day, with an acute onset of low back pain. He diagnosed 

an acute lumbar strain and referred claimant to Dr. Bruce Reid, 

an orthopedic surgeon. 

 On September 12, 1994, Dr. Reid noted that claimant's back 

pain began on September 5, 1994, but that claimant did not admit 

to any specific episode at work. Dr. Reid also noted that 

claimant believed the sum total of his work activities caused his 

back pain. Dr. Reid diagnosed myofascial-type pain and a 

thoracic/lumbar strain. On November 10, 1994, after a short 

course of physical therapy, Dr. Reid released claimant to return 
 3 

to full-duty. Claimant denied telling Dr. Reid that his injury 

did not result from a specific incident at work. Claimant also 

denied telling Dr. Reid that he believed the sum total of his 

lifting activities at work caused his injury. 

 The deputy commissioner did not accept claimant's testimony 

because it was not consistent with the medical history collected 

by Dr. Reid. The full commission reversed the deputy's 

determination, and found that 

 the claimant has met his burden. He 

testified that he felt a sharp pain in his 

lower back while lifting a tire and twisting. 

 The record reflects that the claimant left 

work due to his pain. His testimony that he 

informed the assistant manager of the injury 

the following day is uncontradicted. We next 

consider whether the medical record supports 

the claimant's testimony. A medical history 

cannot be relied on to determine how an 

accident occurred. Board of Supervisors v. 

Martin, 3 Va. App. 139, 348 S.E.2d 540 

(1986), appeal dismissed, 363 S.E.2d 703 (Va. 

1987). However, it is admissible as either a 

prior consistent or inconsistent statement, 

or as an admission of a party opponent. 2 

Charles E. Friend, The Law of Evidence in 
 4 

Virginia, §§ 18-33, 34 (4th ed. 1993). Here, 

the initial treating physician noted a 

history of lifting at work, with an acute 

onset of lower back pain. His diagnosis of 

an acute lumbar strain is more consistent 

with an injury from an identifiable incident, 

rather than a cumulative trauma injury. 

 If, as in this case, "the deputy commissioner's 

determination of credibility is based upon the substance of the 

testimony rather than upon the witness's demeanor, such a finding 

is as determinable by the full commission as by the deputy." 

Kroger Co. v. Morris, 14 Va. App. 233, 236, 415 S.E.2d 879, 880 

(1992). 

 Claimant's testimony, which is consistent with the emergency 

room attending physician's notes, provides credible evidence to 

support the commission's finding that claimant sustained an 

injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his 

employment on September 5, 1994. The deputy commissioner's 

credibility determination was based on the evidence and the 

substance of claimant's testimony. Therefore, the full 

commission could make its own credibility determination. Id. In 

its role as fact finder, the commission was entitled to give 

little weight to Dr. Reid's history notes in light of claimant's 

denial that he made such statements to Dr. Reid. Moreover, 

without specifically citing to Pence, the commission followed 
 5 

Pence's directive by considering claimant's description of his 

accident in light of the medical histories he gave to his 

physicians.1 

 The commission could reasonably infer from claimant's 

testimony and the emergency room attending physician's history 

and diagnosis that claimant sustained an identifiable incident on 

September 5, 1994, which caused an obvious sudden mechanical or 

structural change in his body. "Where reasonable inferences may 

be drawn from the evidence in support of the commission's factual 

findings, they will not be disturbed by this Court on appeal." 

Hawks v. Henrico County Sch. Bd., 7 Va. App. 398, 404, 374 S.E.2d 

695, 698 (1988). 

 For the reasons stated, we affirm the commission's decision. 

 Affirmed.

 

 1The commission stated that "a medical history cannot be 

relied on to determine how an accident occurred." Martin, 3 Va. 

App. at 144, 348 S.E.2d at 542. We note that this rule applies 

when the claimant fails to testify to facts showing an injury by 

accident. In that situation, the rule prevents the claimant from 

using a medical history to meet his burden of proof. Pence, 20 

Va. App. at 318, 456 S.E.2d at 543. As the commission correctly 

noted, medical histories are admissible to corroborate or impeach 

testimony where a claimant has testified to facts showing an 

injury by accident. McMurphy Coal Co. v. Miller, 20 Va. App. 57, 

59, 455 S.E.2d 265, 266 (1995).