COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Willis and Overton 

Argued at Alexandria, Virginia 

IOANNIS ANASTASIS 

v. Record No. 0761-95-4 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 BY JUDGE JOSEPH E. BAKER 

C & T PAINTING COMPANY FEBRUARY 6, 1996 

and 

AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 Craig A. Brown (Lawrence J. Pascal; Ashcraft & Gerel, 

 on brief), for appellant. 

 Roger S. Mackey (Law Offices of Conrad A. Fontaine, 

 on brief), for appellees. 

 In this appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation 

Commission (commission), Ioannis Anastasis (claimant) presents 

the sole issue of whether the commission erroneously found that 

he failed to sustain his burden to show that he incurred an 

injury that arose from an identifiable incident or sudden 

precipitating event while employed by C & T Painting Company 

(employer). Finding no error, we affirm the commission's 

decision. 

 The facts referenced herein are stated in the light most 

favorable to the employer, the prevailing party below. Crisp v. 

Brown's Tysons Corner Dodge, Inc., 1 Va. App 503, 504, 339 S.E.2d 

916, 916 (1986). As the parties are familiar with the facts 

 

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

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

disclosed by the record, we cite only those necessary to an 

understanding of this opinion. 

 Claimant contends that on April 27, 1993, he sustained an 

injury when he fell on his buttocks while working for employer. 

At the time, he says that he was sandblasting a bridge which was 

to be painted. The work area where claimant testified that he 

fell was on a scaffold enclosed by a tarp concealing him from the 

view of others. 

 Christos Triantafillopolos (owner) testified that claimant 

had been working as a sandblaster on a scaffold on the day 

claimant asserts he fell. However, owner said that when claimant 

came down from the scaffold, he stated his reason for his descent 

was that he was tired and made no mention of a fall. The owner 

further testified that when claimant failed to work on the 

following day, he asserted that it was because his foot was tired 

from moving the tarp with his foot. 

 One of claimant's co-workers testified that on April 27, 

1993, when claimant came down for lunch nothing appeared to be 

wrong with claimant but that later that day claimant said he had 

"hurt his leg or neck." The co-worker further testified that 

claimant said he hurt his leg while sandblasting and, because of 

his advanced age, he could not meet the challenge of another 

sandblaster who raced him to see who sandblasted faster. 

 On April 30, 1993, three days after the event claimant 

contends entitles him to compensation, he was examined by Dr. 
- 3 - 

Panayiotis Baltatzis, an internist. Dr. Baltatzis's report 

concerning claimant's first visit does not mention that claimant 

asked to be treated for a back injury. Rather, the doctor's 

report indicates that claimant told him that he had been pushing 

against the tarp for three to four hours a day. 

 Several months later, when seen by other doctors, claimant 

apparently referred to a "slip and fall" while at work. 

 In its opinion, the commission reviewed the medical evidence 

and facts related by the owner and the conflicting evidence of 

claimant and his witness and found that claimant had not shown by 

a preponderance of the evidence that he had suffered an injury by 

accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on 

April 27, 1993. 

 The fact that contrary evidence may be in the record is of 

no consequence if there is credible evidence to support the 

commission's finding. Russell Loungewear v. Gray, 2 Va. App. 90, 

95, 341 S.E.2d 824, 826 (1986). It is fundamental that a finding 

of fact made by the commission is conclusive and binding upon 

this Court. Commonwealth v. Powell, 2 Va. App. 712, 714, 347 

S.E.2d 532, 533 (1986). A question raised by conflicting medical 

opinions is a question of fact. Id. We have reviewed the record 

and find there is credible evidence sufficient to support the 

commission's decision. Accordingly, we are bound by the finding 

of the commission and affirm its decision. 

 Affirmed.