Augusta County Sheriff's Dept. v. Overbey

Decision Date31 October 1997
Docket NumberNo. 962561,962561
Citation254 Va. 522,492 S.E.2d 631
PartiesAUGUSTA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al. v. Patrick L. OVERBEY. Record
CourtVirginia Supreme Court

Frank K. Friedman (John P. Grove; Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, on briefs), Roanoke, for appellants.

Thomas W. Dixon, Jr. (Nelson, McPherson, Summers & Santos, on brief), Staunton, for appellee.

Amici Curiae: Virginia Association of Counties and others (S. Vernon Priddy, III; Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, on brief), Richmond, in support of appellants.

Amicus Curiae: Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Attorney General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General, on brief), in support of appellee.

Amicus Curiae: Fraternal Order of Police Virginia State Lodge (Malcolm Parks, III; Christopher A. Jones; Maloney, Barr & Huennekens, on brief), Richmond, in support of appellee.

Amicus Curiae: Commonwealth of Virginia, Office of the Lieutenant Governor (Michael A. Kernbach, on brief), Fairfax, in support of appellee.

Present: CARRICO, C.J., COMPTON, LACY, HASSELL, and KINSER, JJ., and STEPHENSON and WHITING, Senior Justices.

WHITING, Senior Justice.

In an employer's appeal of a workers' compensation claim, we consider a provision in Code § 65.2-402(B) which creates a presumption that a deputy sheriff's heart disease was an occupational disease suffered in the line of duty "unless such presumption is overcome by a preponderance of competent evidence to the contrary." 1

While on duty and talking to another deputy sheriff, Deputy Sheriff Patrick Lindy Overbey sustained sharp chest pains for a period of 9 or 10 minutes on the morning of January 31, 1995. Later that day, acting as a deputy sheriff-security guard at a local high school basketball game, Overbey again suffered chest pains which his attending physician, Dr. David B. Chernoff, diagnosed as a myocardial infarction or "heart attack."

Following a period of hospitalization and recovery, Overbey filed a claim for workers' compensation against his employer, the Augusta County Sheriff's Department, and its insurer, the Virginia Municipal Group Self-Insurance Association (collectively, the employer). Asserting that Overbey's disability was not the result of an occupational disease suffered in the line of his duties as a deputy sheriff, the employer denied liability.

After a hearing, a deputy commissioner of the Workers' Compensation Commission dismissed the claim on the ground that the evidence was sufficient to overcome the Code § 65.2-402(B) presumption that Overbey's heart disease was a result of work-related causes. On Overbey's appeal, the Workers' Compensation Commission disagreed with the deputy commissioner and awarded benefits. On the employer's appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Commission's decision. Concluding that this case involves matters of significant precedential value, we awarded an appeal to the employer. Code § 17-116.07(B).

Prior to the hearing before the deputy commissioner, the employer took the deposition of Dr. Chernoff. According to Dr. Chernoff, although there was no "single etiologic cause" for Overbey's heart attack, there were several "risk factors" which he thought caused the attack. Dr. Chernoff listed the following risk factors: (1) a history of heavy smoking (according to Overbey, he had smoked from two to two-and-a-half packs of cigarettes each day from age 19 until he had his heart attack at the age of 41); (2) elevated cholesterol; (3) a family history of heart trouble (Overbey's father had a heart attack while "in his 50's"); and (4) non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus coupled with a strong family history of diabetes.

Although Dr. Chernoff did not ask Overbey about his specific job duties, Dr. Chernoff had previously treated "a few" law enforcement officers in the Staunton area and "a number of Security Police" while he was a physician in the United States Air Force. Dr. Chernoff testified that, in his opinion, Overbey's employment was not a risk factor or a cause of his heart disease. However, on cross-examination, Dr. Chernoff indicated that it was "possible" that "stress" may have contributed to cause Overbey's heart attack.

Overbey testified about the stressful incidents in his job. In his regular duties as a civil process server, he had many papers to serve in a limited time, occasionally upon people who were uncooperative. Overbey also testified that while serving papers, he encountered dogs "two or three times a week." He responded to domestic violence calls "[a]bout once a week," house or bank burglar alarms on an "average of two or three a week," and "on occasions," he "worked accidents." When he could "feel" his heart racing while driving a car at work, he would "just pull off the side of the road and just wind down."

Approximately three weeks before Overbey's heart attack, his wife was suspended from her job, and a few days later she was charged with embezzlement and forgery. About a week before his heart attack, Overbey and his wife separated. Overbey testified that his state of mind was "easier" after the separation. However, when Dr. Chernoff was treating Overbey's heart disease, Overbey's description of his wife's legal problems caused Dr. Chernoff to describe them as the "main stressor." No physician contradicted Dr. Chernoff's testimony listing the non-job-related risk factors which he thought contributed to cause Overbey's heart disease.

To recover compensation for heart disease, a workers' compensation claimant must ordinarily establish, among other things, that the illness is an "occupational disease ... by clear and convincing evidence, to a reasonable medical certainty, [and] that it arose out of and in the course of employment." Code § 65.2-401. 2 However, in the case of certain law enforcement officials, including deputy sheriffs, Code § 65.2-402(B) creates a presumption that their heart diseases are occupationally related, "unless such presumption is overcome by a preponderance of competent evidence to the contrary."

The employer concedes that the presumption in Code § 65.2-402(B) requires it to establish a non-work-related cause for Overbey's heart condition and that job...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • City of Hopewell v. Tirpak
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • July 28, 1998
    ...pending, claimant petitioned this Court to have the case remanded for new factual findings in light of Augusta County Sheriff's Dep't v. Overbey, 254 Va. 522, 492 S.E.2d 631 (1997), and City of Richmond Police Dep't v. Bass, 26 Va.App. 121, 493 S.E.2d 661 (1997) , both of which were decide......
  • Medlin v. County of Henrico Police
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • February 27, 2001
    ...employer's contention that Medlin and Vass failed to establish an ordinary disease of life claim. Cf. Augusta County Sheriffs Dept. v. Overbey, 254 Va. 522, 527, 492 S.E.2d 631, 634 (1997) (if employer rebuts presumption, burden shifts to employee to "`establish[ ] by clear and convincing e......
  • City of Richmond Police Dept. v. Bass
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • December 9, 1997
    ...merely 'must adduce competent medical evidence of a non-work-related cause of the disabling disease.' " Augusta County Sheriff's Dep't v. Overbey, --- Va. ----, 492 S.E.2d 631 (1997) (citing Doss v. Fairfax County Fire & Rescue Dep't, 229 Va. 440, 442, 331 S.E.2d 795, 796 (1985)). The Court......
  • Bass v. City of Richmond Police Dept.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • June 11, 1999
    ...a genetic cause. Id. at 134, 493 S.E.2d at 667. The Court stated that, "[u]nder the standard set forth in [Augusta County Sheriff's Dept. v. Overbey, 254 Va. 522, 492 S.E.2d 631 (1997)], this evidence of a genetic cause sufficiently rebutted the statutory presumption that claimant's heart d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT