COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton 

MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA 

 SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0247-97-2 PER CURIAM 

 JUNE 17, 1997 

BARBARA A. HAWKINS 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General; 

Gregory Lucyk, Senior Assistant Attorney 

General; Ingrid E. Olson, Assistant Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellant. 

 (T. Andrew Lingle, on brief), for appellee. 

 Medical College of Virginia School of Dentistry (employer) 

appeals a decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission 

(commission) awarding benefits to Barbara A. Hawkins (claimant). 

 Employer contends that the commission erred in finding that 

claimant proved that she sustained an injury by accident arising 

out of her employment on December 11, 1995. 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. 

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

finding by the commission that an injury did or did not arise out 

of the employment is a mixed finding of law and fact and is 

properly reviewable on appeal. See Jones v. Colonial 

 

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

designated for publication. 
 2 

Williamsburg Found., 8 Va. App. 432, 434, 382 S.E.2d 300, 301 

(1989). The phrase "arising out of" refers to the origin or 

cause of the injury. See County of Chesterfield v. Johnson, 237 

Va. 180, 183, 376 S.E.2d 73, 74 (1989). To prevail, claimant 

must "show that the conditions of the workplace . . . caused the 

injury." Plumb Rite Plumbing Serv. v. Barbour, 8 Va. App. 482, 

484, 382 S.E.2d 305, 306 (1989). 

 In holding that the back injury claimant sustained when she 

bent over to retrieve paper from a cabinet arose out of her 

employment, the commission made the following factual findings: 

 Here, claimant was required to perform her 

job duties in a limited workspace. She had 

to twist to move dental instruments through 

different phases of sterilization. As a 

final step, the claimant was required to wrap 

the instruments in disposable paper. This 

paper was located in a cabinet on the bottom 

shelf, and she had to twist and bend in order 

to retrieve it. The claimant maintained this 

awkward position in order to accomplish an 

employment-related task. She was in this 

position due to the confined work area and 

the location of the cabinet. 

 Claimant's testimony constitutes credible evidence to 

support the commission's factual findings. Thus, these findings 

are binding and conclusive upon us. Based upon these findings, 

the commission could reasonably conclude that claimant's injury 

arose from an actual risk occasioned by her work environment. 

The commission, in its role as fact finder, was entitled to give 

more weight to claimant's testimony than to the testimony of 

claimant's supervisor, Teresa Duke, who did not witness the 
 3 

actual mechanics of claimant's injury. Moreover, "[t]he fact 

that there is contrary evidence in the record is of no 

consequence if there is credible evidence to support the 

commission's finding." Wagner Enters., Inc. v. Brooks, 12 Va. 

App. 890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1991). 

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

 Affirmed.
 4 

Annunziata, J., dissenting. 

 Claimant testified that she felt a "funny pull in [her] 

back," when she bent over at the waist and reached to get the 

"blue wrap," which was kept inside a cabinet. Claimant's 

attorney asked claimant the following question: "And at the time 

you felt that pain were you twisting or bending at all?" 

Claimant responded: "I was bent over." Only after further 

leading questions from her counsel did claimant state that she 

had to turn to her right. Claimant never testified, however, 

that she twisted to her right as she bent to retrieve the "blue 

wrap." In addition, claimant signed and certified as true an 

accident report which revealed that she was bending over and was 

not twisting or carrying any weight at the time of her injury. 

Dr. O.T. Graham, who began treating claimant on December 13, 

1995, recorded the following history: "Just [b]ent over to get 

blue wrap in the bottom of the cabinets and hurt low back." 

 Claimant's supervisor, Teresa Duke, testified that claimant 

did not have anything in her hands and the cabinet door was not 

yet open when the injury occurred. Duke noted that based upon 

the placement of claimant's feet at the time of the injury, she 

did not believe that claimant had twisted to reach her position. 

 The simple act of bending over is a hazard to which all 

people are exposed and, absent a finding that claimant was 

involved in a significant exertion, awkward position, or other 

employment-related hazard, she is not entitled to an award of 
 5 

compensation benefits. See Plumb Rite Plumbing Serv. v. Barbour, 

8 Va. App. 482, 484, 382 S.E.2d 305, 306 (1989). "The mere 

happening of an accident at the workplace, not caused by any work 

related risk or significant work related exertion, is not 

compensable." Id.

 Based upon this record, I find that no credible evidence 

proved that claimant engaged in any significant exertion, that 

her action of bending involved any awkward position, or that any 

condition or hazard peculiar to her workplace caused her injury, 

aside from the usual act of bending to pick up a piece of paper. 

 For these reasons, I would reverse the commission's decision 

awarding benefits to claimant.