COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Elder and Fitzpatrick 

CORTE COMPANY, INC. 

AND 

TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0440-97-3 PER CURIAM 

 JUNE 24, 1997 

FRED EUGENE HOLDREN 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Jennifer G. Marwitz; Law Offices of Richard A. 

Hobson, on brief), for appellants. 

 (Donald R. Johnson; Donald T. Caruth; 

Brewster, Morhouse & Cameron, on brief), for 

appellee. 

 Corte Company, Inc. and its insurer (hereinafter 

collectively referred to as "employer") appeal a decision of the 

Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) awarding permanent 

total disability benefits to Fred Eugene Holdren (claimant) 

pursuant to Code § 65.2-503. Employer contends that the 

commission erred in finding that claimant proved (1) he is 

permanently and totally disabled from gainful employment due to 

his loss of vision in both eyes; and (2) the loss of vision in 

his right eye was caused by his compensable February 6, 1987 

injury by accident. Finding no error, we affirm. 

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

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

 

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

designated for publication. 
 2 

Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). "[I]t 

is fundamental that a finding of fact made by the Commission is 

conclusive and binding upon this court on review. A question 

raised by conflicting medical opinion is a question of fact." 

Commonwealth v. Powell, 2 Va. App. 712, 714, 347 S.E.2d 532, 533 

(1986). "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). 

 In holding that claimant proved he is not able to use his 

eyes in any substantial degree in gainful employment and in 

awarding permanent total disability benefits to claimant, the 

commission made the following findings: 

 [I]t is uncontradicted that claimant is 

legally blind. Even the carrier's 

rehabilitation expert suggests a sheltered 

workshop for the blind as an appropriate 

initial vocational placement. Dr. [Yasier] 

Kanawati has clearly stated that the 

claimant's vision problems stem from the 

accident, and we so find, notwithstanding Dr. 

[Stephen H.] Blaydes' questioning regarding 

the precise mechanism of injury to the right 

eye. 

 In its role as fact finder, the commission was entitled to 

weigh the medical evidence and to accept the opinion of 

claimant's treating physician, Dr. Kanawati. The commission was 

also entitled to reject the opinion of independent medical 

examiner, Dr. Blaydes, who examined claimant on one occasion at 

employer's request. In cases of conflicting medical evidence, 

"'[t]he general rule is that when an attending physician is 
 3 

positive in his diagnosis . . . , great weight will be given by 

the courts to his opinion.'" Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. 

Reeves, 1 Va. App. 435, 439, 339 S.E.2d 570, 572 (1986) 

(citations omitted). The medical records and opinions of Dr. 

Kanawati constitute credible evidence to support the commission's 

finding that claimant sustained permanent and total disability as 

a result of the February 6, 1987 work accident, which rendered 

him unable to use his eyes in any substantial degree in any 

gainful employment. 

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

 Affirmed.