STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS 

RANDALL D. BARB, FILED 

August 26, 2016 Claimant Below, Petitioner RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

OF WEST VIRGINIA
 vs.) No. 15-0844 (BOR Appeal No. 2050190) 

(Claim No. 2015010133) 

UTZ QUALITY FOODS, INC., 

Employer Below, Respondent 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner, Randall D. Barb, by John H. Shumate, his attorney, appeals the decision of the 

West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. Utz Quality Foods, Inc., by its 

attorney, Jeffrey B. Brannon, filed a timely response. 

This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated July 29, 2015, in which 

the Board affirmed the January 15, 2015, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges. 

In its Order, the Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s October 9, 2014, decision 

rejecting 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. 

Mr. Barb worked for Utz Quality Foods, Inc., as a route salesman. On September 22, 

2014, he was stocking shelves at one of the stores on his route when his right knee locked 

causing him pain and difficulty getting up. He was evaluated by Patsy Fairchild, PAC, who 

diagnosed sprained right knee. She referred him to physical therapy, for an MRI, and to S. Brett 

Whitfield, M.D. Mr. Barb submitted a report of injury stating he injured his right knee when he 

was squatting like a catcher, went to stand up, and his knee would not extend. The claims 

administrator rejected the claim on October 9, 2014. 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prior to working for Utz Quality Foods, Inc., Mr. Barb sustained an injury to his right 

knee on December 14, 2012, while working for his previous employer.1 That injury resulted in 

Mr. Barb undergoing surgery to his right knee, including debridement of lateral meniscal tears 

and microfracture for a full thickness cartilage defect of the lateral femoral condyle. Dr. 

Whitfield performed the surgery on March 13, 2013, and Mr. Barb continued to treat with him 

until September 3, 2013. At that time, Dr. Whitfield noted Mr. Barb had not experienced a 

significant improvement with complaints of pain in the lateral aspect of the knee. An MRI that 

was performed on August 27, 2013, showed no appreciable cartilage growth in the area of the 

condylar defect in the lateral femoral condyle. Dr. Whitfield diagnosed continued right knee pain 

with failure of growth from the microfracture and iliotibial band bursitis of the right knee. He 

gave Mr. Barb a steroid injection to help with the pain. In his opinion, if Mr. Barb continued to 

experience pain, he would need an osteochondral autograft transfer system procedure. 

Mr. Barb had evaluations by three different physicians as part of his claim with his 

previous employer. On June 20, 2013, Prasadarao Mukkamala, M.D., evaluated Mr. Barb and 

noted his chief complaint was right knee pain and weakness. Yogesh Chand, M.D., evaluated 

Mr. Barb on February 17, 2014, and noted Mr. Barb reported constant pain throughout the knee 

and stated that he used a brace sometimes. On March 20, 2014, Mr. Barb told Michael Condaras, 

M.D., that he had constant pain in his knee and that his knee was aggravated by prolonged 

standing or walking. He also stated that driving bothers his knee. 

The Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s rejection of the claim on 

January 15, 2015. It reviewed Mr. Barb’s hearing testimony and noted that on cross-examination 

Mr. Barb changed his responses to the answers regarding the condition of his knee prior to 

September 22, 2014. It noted that Mr. Barb initially testified his knee was fully functional before 

September 22, 2014; however, he told Dr. Condaras in April of 2014 that he had constant pain in 

his knee; had pain on the lateral aspect of the knee; and that prolonged standing, walking, or 

driving aggravated the knee. 

The Office of Judges reviewed the surveillance video from the store where Mr. Barb was 

working when he said he injured his knee on September 22, 2014. The video showed Mr. Barb 

entering and exiting the store in the same manner, with no observable indications of pain. It also 

showed Mr. Barb stocking the shelf. The Office of Judges found the video did not show him 

walking with a limp or otherwise having trouble walking upon exiting the store. It found this 

evidence to be persuasive. 

The Office of Judges did not find the medical evidence stating Mr. Barb sustained an 

injury to his knee on September 22, 2014, to be persuasive considering Mr. Barb’s prior injury 

regarding the same knee, the need for surgery due to that injury, and his continuing symptoms. 

The Office of Judges determined Mr. Barb failed to show he injured his right knee in the course 

of and as a result of his employment on September 22, 2014. 

1 This Court addressed the previous claim in its decision in Barb v. Multifresh, Inc./LWF EIN 

Resources, LLC, No. 15-0267 (Feb. 4, 2016) (memorandum decision). 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Board of Review adopted the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Office of 

Judges in affirming its Order on July 29, 2015. After review, we agree with the reasoning of the 

Office of Judges and conclusions of the Board of Review. Mr. Barb sustained an injury to his 

right knee on December 14, 2012, that required extensive surgery. He continued to have pain and 

problems with activities of daily living due to that injury as documented by Dr. Condaras. Mr. 

Barb failed to show he sustained an injury to his right knee on September 22, 2014. 

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 

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: August 26, 2016 

CONCURRED IN BY: 

Chief Justice Menis E. Ketchum 

Justice Robin J. Davis 

Justice Margaret L. Workman 

Justice Allen H. Loughry II 

Justice Brent D. Benjamin, Not Participating 

3