Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2015

Inova Loudoun Hospital and Inova Health Systems v. Najat Chemlali Goode

Inova Loudoun Hospital and Inova Health Systems v. Najat Chemlali Goode
Court of Appeals of Virginia · Decided March 17, 2015

Inova Loudoun Hospital and Inova Health Systems v. Najat Chemlali Goode

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Alston, Decker and Senior Judge Frank UNPUBLISHED

INOVA LOUDOUN HOSPITAL AND INOVA HEALTH SYSTEMS MEMORANDUM OPINION* v. Record No. 1612-14-4 PER CURIAM MARCH 17, 2015 NAJAT CHEMLALI GOODE

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Joshua M. Wulf; David A. Obuchowicz; Midkiff, Muncie & Ross, P.C., on brief), for appellants.

(David B. Vermont; Ashcraft & Gerel, LLP, on brief), for appellee.

Inova Loudoun Hospital (employer) appeals from an August 4, 2014 order of the Workers’ Compensation Commission affirming a deputy commissioner’s opinion finding that Najat Chemlali Goode (claimant) proved injuries by accident to her neck and upper back, that her medical treatment and disability were causally related to the accident, and that she had ongoing partial work incapacity related to the accident. On appeal, employer contends the commission erred by (1) finding “claimant injured her neck and upper back in the February 26, 2013 accident,” (2) finding “claimant’s medical treatment from March 12, 2013 and thereafter was causally related to the February 26, 2013 accident,” and (3) “presum[ing] that the claimant remained partially disabled after January 28, 2014 . . . .”

Upon reviewing the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission’s decision. Rule 5A:27. We affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Goode v. Inova Loudoun * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.

Hosp., JCN VA00000748079 (Aug. 4, 2014). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.

-2-

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.