COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis 

CENTIN CORPORATION 

AND 

NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE 

 COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 PER CURIAM 

v. Record No. 1523-95-2 DECEMBER 12, 1995 

 

LEE E. MITCHEM 

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

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

Anderson, Marks & Miller, on briefs), for appellants. 

 (David L. Pillsbury; Felicia C. Russell, on brief), 

for appellee. 

 Centin Corporation and its insurer (hereinafter collectively 

referred to as "employer") contend that the Workers' Compensation 

Commission erred in finding that Lee E. Mitchem proved he was 

entitled to an award of temporary total disability benefits 

commencing January 10, 1994. Employer contends that Mitchem was, 

at all times, partially disabled and he failed to market his 

residual capacity. Pursuant to Rule 5A:21(b), Mitchem raises the 

additional question of whether the commission erred in failing to 

hold employer responsible for the cost of the medical treatment 

rendered by Dr. John Kendrick. 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 

 

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

designated for publication. 
 2 

decision. Rule 5A:27. 

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

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

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

Factual findings made by the commission must 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). 

 In awarding disability benefits to Mitchem, the commission 

accepted the opinion of Dr. Kendrick. On April 15, 1994, Dr. 

Kendrick opined that Mitchem had been unable to work since 

January 10, 1994 and would remain disabled for at least another 

three to six months. On December 15, 1994, Dr. Kendrick opined 

that Mitchem remained disabled from work. In its role as fact 

finder, the commission was entitled to accept Dr. Kendrick's 

opinion, on the basis that he was the only physician who treated 

Mitchem from October 27, 1993 through February 13, 1995, and to 

reject the contrary opinion of Dr. Baljit S. Sidhu. "Questions 

raised by conflicting medical opinions must be decided by the 

commission." Penley v. Island Creek Coal Co., 8 Va. App. 310, 

318, 381 S.E.2d 231, 236 (1989). Dr. Kendrick's medical records 

and opinions provide substantial credible evidence to support the 

commission's findings.1

 

 The commission ruled that employer was not responsible for 

 

 1Because of our ruling affirming the commission's finding of 

total disability, we need not address the marketing issue. 
 3 

the cost of Dr. Kendrick's unauthorized treatment. There is no 

evidence in the medical records to show that Dr. Sidhu ever 

abandoned or released Mitchem from his care, that he rendered 

inadequate treatment to Mitchem, or that he referred Mitchem to 

Dr. Kendrick. Rather, Dr. Sidhu's October 26, 1993 office notes 

reveal that Mitchem's attorney wanted Mitchem to seek a second 

opinion from another doctor. In addition, Mitchem testified that 

he wanted a second opinion in October 1993 and that his lawyer 

recommended he see Dr. Kendrick. Accordingly, we cannot find as 

a matter of law that the commission erred in denying Mitchem 

recovery of the cost of Dr. Kendrick's unauthorized treatment. 

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

 Affirmed.