Legal Opinion

Timbrook v. O'Sullivan Corp.

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided January 25, 1994No. Record No. 2350-92-4PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

COLEMAN, J.

In this workers’ compensation appeal, we hold that when an employer discharges a partially disabled employee for unjustifiably failing or refusing to report for selective employment, the employee is not barred from curing the unjustified refusal.

The commission ruled that Ethel Timbrook was forever barred from curing her unjustified refusal of selective employment, based upon our holding in C&P Telephone v. Murphy, 12 Va. App. 633, 406 S.E.2d 190, aff’d on reh’g en banc, 13 Va. App. 304, 411 S.E.2d 444 (1991). In Murphy, we held that a partially disabled employee forfeits his…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. WatsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1979
  2. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1991
  3. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1991
  4. Marval Poultry Co., Inc. v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1983
  5. Thompson v. Hampton InstituteCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1987

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Artis v. Ottenberg's Bakers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Virginia · 2005
  2. Eppling v. Schultz Dining ProgramsCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1994
  3. Potomac Edison Co. of Virginia, Inc. v. CashCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1994
  4. Richfood, Inc. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1995
  5. Montalbano v. Richmond Ford, LLCCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2010

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API