Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2015

Catherine Rebecca Rogers v. VPI State University/Commonwealth of Virginia

Catherine Rebecca Rogers v. VPI State University/Commonwealth of Virginia
Court of Appeals of Virginia · Decided September 15, 2015

Catherine Rebecca Rogers v. VPI State University/Commonwealth of Virginia

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Humphreys, O’Brien and Senior Judge Bumgardner UNPUBLISHED

CATHERINE REBECCA ROGERS MEMORANDUM OPINION* v. Record No. 0223-15-3 PER CURIAM SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 VPI STATE UNIVERSITY/ COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Catherine Rebecca Rogers, pro se, on brief).

(Mark R. Herring, Attorney General; Rhodes B. Ritenour, Deputy Attorney General; Scott J. Fitzgerald, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Mary Hendricks Hawkins, Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Catherine Rebecca Rogers (claimant) appeals the decision by the Workers’ Compensation Commission (commission) denying her request for benefits because claimant failed to prove an injury by accident. On appeal, claimant argues that (1) the evidence proved an injury by accident; and (2) the commission erred in finding that she did not meet the requirements for the admission of after-discovered evidence.

We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its opinion.

See Rogers v. VPI State Univ., JCN VA00000928885 (Jan. 9, 2015). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.1 Affirmed.

VPI State University/Commonwealth of Virginia moved to dismiss the appeal because claimant failed to comply with Rules 5A:2, 5A:4(b), 5A:20, 5A:24, 5A:25, and 5A:26. Since we summarily affirm, we deny the motion to dismiss. -2-

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