A. Except for hearing or vision loss that has not reached a compensable level of disability, if an employee has a permanent disability or has sustained a permanent injury in service in the armed forces of the United States or in another employment other than that in which he receives a subsequent permanent injury by accident, such as specified in § 65.2-503, he shall be entitled to compensation only for the degree of incapacity which would have resulted from the later accident if the earlier disability or injury had not existed.
B. Except for hearing or vision loss that has not reached a compensable level of disability, if an employee has a permanent disability or has sustained a permanent injury in service to his employer and receives a subsequent permanent injury by accident, such as specified in § 65.2-503, he shall be entitled to compensation only for the degree of incapacity which would have resulted from the later accident if the earlier disability or injury had not existed.
Code 1950, § 65-55; 1968, c. 660, § 65.1-58; 1991, c. 355; 1996, c. 448.
Notes of Decisions
Sinclair v. Shelter Constr. Corp., 474 S.E.2d 856 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 6× “In so holding, we ruled that Moore’s preinjury condition was not one that implicated “the provision in the Code that relieves an employer from liability for that portion of a compensable injury that pre-existed the employer-employee relationship and the injurious work-related…”
Fairfax Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Martin-Elberhi, 687 S.E.2d 91 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 8× “2d 432, 434 (1994) (recognizing that Code § 65.2-505 excludes employer’s liability for “pre-existing injuries that place the employee’s disability at or above a defined level of compensability”), aff'd, 249 Va.”
Virginia Fibre Corp. v. Moore, 440 S.E.2d 432 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 2× “Code § 65.2-505. We concur in the commission’s conclusion that the legislative intent behind that provision extends only to pre-existing injuries that place the employee’s disability at or above a defined level of compensability.”
Merck v. Vincent (Va. 2021).
· cites it 2× “3 Former Code § 1887(34) is now codified as amended at Code § 65.2-505(A). 11 2. MORRIS REAFFIRMED NOBLIN’S HOLDING BUT DIFFERENT FACTS ALLOWED A DIFFERENT STATUTE— FORMER CODE § 1887(36)—TO APPLY In Morris, an employee lost his left hand in 1935.”
Amanda Clements v. Augusta Health & Saf. First Ins. Co. (Va. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “at 546 (emphasis added) (quoting Code § 65.2-505(A)). We learn from these cases that, while not an exclusive test, factors to be considered in determining whether there is a permanent functional loss include the treating physician’s opinion, whether claimant was placed under…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 65.2-505(A) — 3 cases
Fairfax Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Martin-Elberhi, 687 S.E.2d 91 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
“2d 432, 434 (1994) (recognizing that Code § 65.2-505 excludes employer’s liability for “pre-existing injuries that place the employee’s disability at or above a defined level of compensability”), aff'd, 249 Va.”
Merck v. Vincent (Va. 2021).
“3 Former Code § 1887(34) is now codified as amended at Code § 65.2-505(A). 11 2. MORRIS REAFFIRMED NOBLIN’S HOLDING BUT DIFFERENT FACTS ALLOWED A DIFFERENT STATUTE— FORMER CODE § 1887(36)—TO APPLY In Morris, an employee lost his left hand in 1935.”
Amanda Clements v. Augusta Health & Saf. First Ins. Co. (Va. Ct. App. 2021).
“at 546 (emphasis added) (quoting Code § 65.2-505(A)). We learn from these cases that, while not an exclusive test, factors to be considered in determining whether there is a permanent functional loss include the treating physician’s opinion, whether claimant was placed under…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.