HEI Hospitality and North River Insurance Company v. Veronica Almaraz, et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Alston, Chafin and Senior Judge Haley HEI HOSPITALITY AND NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY v. Record No. 1414-15-2 MEMORANDUM OPINION* PER CURIAM JANUARY 12, 2016 VERONICA ALMARAZ, EMBASSY SUITES OF TYSONS CORNER AND AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Jesse F. Narron; Jonas A. Callis; PennStuart, on brief), for appellants. (Andrew S. Kasmer, on brief), for appellee Veronica Almaraz. (D. Boyd Cook; David A. Obuchowicz; Midkiff, Muncie & Ross, P.C., on brief), for appellees Embassy Suites of Tysons Corner and American Zurich Insurance Company. HEI Hospitality and North River Insurance Company (collectively “employer”) appeal from an August 11, 2015 order of the Workers’ Compensation Commission affirming a deputy commissioner’s opinion awarding Veronica Almaraz (“claimant”) medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits for an injury by accident occurring on July 24, 2014. On appeal, employer contends the Commission erred by finding the evidence sufficient to prove (1) “that [claimant] suffered a compensable injury by accident to her back on July 24, 2014,” (2) “that any disability after July 24, 2014 was causally related to the July 24, 2014 incident,” and (3) “that any medical treatment after July 24, 2014 was reasonable, necessary, and causally related to the July 24, 2014 incident.” * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties, 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 Almaraz v. HEI Hospitality, JCN VA00000953877 and JCN VA00000804915 (Aug. 11, 2015). 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-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
