of the
October of 2011 injury and was therefore compensable. The Office of Judges used the standards
enumerated in Wilson v. Workers’ Compensation Commissioner, 174 W.Va. 61, 328 S.E.2d 485
(1984), to arrive at its decision. The Office of Judges found that Mr. Eller’s deposition
testimony, that his knee condition remained symptomatic after the October of 2011 injury, was
credible. The Office of Judges also relied on Dr. Surface’s evaluation of Mr. Eller’s knee and his
determination that the April of 2012 injury was connected to the work-related October of 2011
injury. The Office of Judges ordered the authorization of treatment, including surgery, and
temporary total disability benefits as established by appropriate medical evidence.

        The Board of Review reversed the Office of Judges’ decision on the basis that it was
clearly wrong in view of the evidence on the whole record. The Board of Review found that the
only compensable condition in this case was the October of 2011 knee contusion. It held that the
record contained no evidence that the current treatment, including surgery, was medically
necessary and reasonably required to treat the knee contusion.

        The Board of Review’s decision is based on a material misrepresentation or
mischaracterization of the evidentiary record. The only evidence on the record regarding the
April of 2012, injury are the reports of Dr. Surface and the accompanying MRI. Dr. Surface
found that the April of 2012, injury was related to the compensable October of 2011 injury. He
also determined that further treatment and surgery were necessary to treat the injury. There is no
evidence on the record to refute his medical opinion.

        For the foregoing reasons, we find that the decision of the Board of Review is clearly the
result of erroneous conclusions of law. Therefore, the decision of the Board of Review is
reversed and remanded with instructions to determine the compensability of the April 3, 2011,
injury.

                                              