COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Elder, Bumgardner and Lemons 

LYNN J. DEMPSEY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 1894-98-2 PER CURIAM 

 FEBRUARY 2, 1999 

ENERFAB CORPORATION AND NATIONAL 

 FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Lynn J. Dempsey, pro se). 

 (Jennifer G. Marwitz; Law Offices of Roya 

Palmer Ewing, on brief), for appellees. 

 Lynn J. Dempsey ("claimant") contends that the Workers' 

Compensation Commission ("commission") erred in (1) denying his 

request made on the day of the hearing to introduce into evidence 

the March 27, 1997 medical report of Dr. H.L. Phillips and two 

office notes of Dr. Frank J. Grady; (2) finding that claimant 

failed to prove that his non-ischemic central retinal vein 

occlusion of the left eye was causally related to his compensable 

November 16, 1995 injury by accident; and (3) failing to apply 

the "two causes" rule. 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 decision. See

Rule 5A:27. 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code § 17-116.010, 

this opinion is not designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

I. and III. 

 Claimant contends that the deputy commissioner abused her 

discretion and denied him due process by refusing to allow him to 

introduce into evidence on the day of the hearing Dr. Phillips's 

medical report and Dr. Grady's office notes. Claimant also 

contends that the commission erred in failing to apply the "two 

causes" rule. 

 Claimant did not request that the full commission review the 

deputy commissioner's denial of his request to introduce the 

medical reports, nor did he argue before the commission that it 

should have applied the "two causes" rule. Decisions of a deputy 

commissioner that are not reviewed by the full commission cannot 

be brought before this Court. See Southwest Architectural 

Prods., Inc. v. Smith, 4 Va. App. 474, 478, 358 S.E.2d 745, 747 

(1987). Furthermore, an issue that is not disputed before the 

commission will not be considered on appeal. See Green v. 

Warwick Plumbing & Heating Corp., 5 Va. App. 409, 413, 364 S.E.2d 

4, 6 (1988); Rule 5A:18. Accordingly, we cannot consider these 

issues on appeal. 

 II. 

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

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

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

 In denying claimant's application, the commission found as 

follows: 

 We have reviewed the medical record in detail 
- 3 - 

and can find no statement from any doctor 

that the claimant's non-ischemic central 

retinal vein occlusion in his left eye was 

caused by exposure to welding flashes on 

November 16, 1995, or was the result of the 

corneal abrasions sustained at that time. 

The closest any doctor comes on this record 

to such a statement is the statement of Dr. 

[W. Wynn] McMullen that claimant's retinal 

condition "appeared to develop in association 

with Mr. Dempsey's ocular injury." (Emphasis 

added). In the immediately preceding 

sentence, Dr. McMullen states that central 

retinal vein occlusion is often of unknown 

cause. We conclude that at most, Dr. 

McMullen was stating no more than a temporal 

association between the claimant's corneal 

abrasions and the development of the central 

retinal vein occlusion. In fact, . . . the 

claimant, during a period of approximately 

two and one-half months, continued to engage 

in his regular duties and responsibilities 

without further complaint. At most, we can 

conclude that there is an undefined temporal 

association between the two conditions. Such 

a conclusion is not sufficient to find the 

necessary causal relationship between the 

claimant's corneal abrasions and his retinal 

condition. 

 The commission's factual findings are supported by the 

record. In light of the lack of any persuasive medical opinion 

causally relating claimant's retinal condition to his compensable 

November 16, 1995 injury by accident, we cannot say as a matter 

of law that claimant's evidence sustained his burden of proof. 

Accordingly, the commission's findings are binding and conclusive 

upon us. See Tomko v. Michael's Plastering Co., 210 Va. 697, 

699, 173 S.E.2d 833, 835 (1970). 

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

 Affirmed.