COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Bumgardner 

Argued at Salem, Virginia 

WILLIAM H. LEIGHTY, DIRECTOR AND 

 VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYSTEM 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 2072-97-3 JUDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER, III 

 APRIL 28, 1998 

JANE S. MUNSEY 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WISE COUNTY 

J. Robert Stump, Judge 

 (Richard Cullen, Attorney General; John Paul 

Woodley, Jr., Deputy Attorney General; 

Michael K. Jackson, Senior Assistant Attorney 

General; Cameron P. Quinn, Assistant Attorney 

General; James W. Osborne, Assistant Attorney 

General, on briefs), for appellants. 

Appellants submitting on briefs. 

 Robert B. Hines, II (Montgomery Law Offices, 

on brief), for appellee. 

 Jane S. Munsey applied for Virginia Retirement System 

disability benefits. The Director denied these benefits, and she 

appealed that decree to the Circuit Court of Wise County. The 

circuit court found that no substantial evidence existed to 

support the finding of nondisability. Specifically it found that 

the opinion of no-disability of Dr. Eric Moffett was not 

substantial evidence when compared to the opinions of Drs. E.R. 

Kidwell and Donald Bales who had treated Ms. Munsey for long 

periods. The circuit court reversed the agency determination. 

Finding that the trial court applied the wrong standard of review 

 

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

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

when it weighed the conflicting evidence, we reverse the trial 

court's decision. 

 Jane S. Munsey is 61 years old and has taught fifth grade in 

the Wise County school system for approximately fourteen years. 

She applied for retirement disability benefits stating that she 

suffered from panic anxiety disorder. Her family physician, Dr. 

Bales, treated her for anxiety and opined that she was probably 

permanently disabled. Upon referral, Dr. Kidwell, a 

psychiatrist, treated her for anxiety and depression through 

April 1995. Dr. Kidwell reported that she had received no long 

term benefits from her medications taken over the years and that 

her prognosis for significant improvement was guarded. 

 The Medical Review Board for the Virginia Retirement System 

appointed Dr. Moffett to conduct an independent examination. He 

concluded that Ms. Munsey was not disabled. Ms. Munsey later 

made an appointment to see Dr. Russell D. McKnight, a 

psychiatrist. He reported that she was moderately depressed and 

disabled and was not likely to return to competitive employment. 

 The Medical Review Board recommended denial of benefits. Munsey 

appealed that decision. 

 The administrative hearing examiner conducted an evidentiary 

hearing July 9, 1996. He concluded that Ms. Munsey had not 

proved she was disabled from further performance of her duties. 

The Virginia Retirement System accepted this recommendation and 

issued a final decision denying an award of disability retirement 

benefits. 
- 3 - 

 The review of an agency decision on appeal to a circuit 

court is limited to determining whether there is substantial 

evidence in the agency record to support its decision. 

Substantial evidence is a term of art defined as evidence that 

might lead a reasonable person to come to the conclusion the 

agency reached. See Virginia Real Estate Comm'n v. Bias, 226 Va. 

264, 269, 308 S.E.2d 123, 125 (1983). 

 The trial court weighed and evaluated the evidence, compared 

the opinions of the different experts, and then concluded that 

the evidence of the appellee was stronger. In doing so, it 

slipped into the role of fact finder rather than a review 

tribunal. It thereby substituted its judgment on the factual 

issues for those of the agency and exceeded its defined role. 

The court may reject the agency's findings of fact only if, 

considering the record as a whole, a reasonable mind would 

necessarily come to a different conclusion. See id. The record 

does not reveal a sound or valid reason why the agency was not 

entitled to accept Dr. Moffett's opinion. 

 In this case credible evidence existed that might lead a 

reasonable person to come to the same conclusion that the agency 

reached. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's decision and 

remand with the direction that the agency decision denying 

disability retirement benefits be reinstated. 

 Reversed and remanded.