54 Van Natta 14 (2002). EDWARD A. MICHALSKI, Claimant.

Case DateJanuary 10, 2002
CourtOregon
Oregon Worker Compensation 2002. 54 Van Natta 14 (2002). EDWARD A. MICHALSKI, Claimant 14In the Matter of the Compensation of EDWARD A. MICHALSKI, ClaimantWCB Case No. 00-03240ORDER ON REVIEWBlack Chapman Et Al, Claimant AttorneysSather Byerly and Holloway, Defense AttorneysReviewing Panel: Members Haynes, Bock, and Phillips Polich. MemberPhillips Polich chose not to sign the order. The insurer requests review of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Stephen Brown's order that set aside its denial of claimant's occupational disease claim for a cervical condition. On review, the issue is compensability. We reverse. FINDINGS OF FACT We adopt the ALJ's findings of fact with the following correction and supplementation. We replace the last sentence in the second finding of fact with the following. On February 10, 2000, Dr. Frank, neurosurgeon, examined claimant on referral from Dr. Meharry, M.D., claimant's treating physician. (Ex. 11). Dr. Frank found that claimant's January 18, 2000 MRI showed degenerative disc disease at C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels, with an osteophyte and evidence of a soft disc herniation at C5-C6 on the right. He opined that claimant had a right C6 radiculopathy and recommended aggressive physical therapy. (Ex. 11-2). As a result of Dr. Frank's recommendation, Dr. Meharry prescribed physical therapy. (Exs. 12, 13). Dr. Meharry last examined claimant on April 18, 2000, for a follow up after claimant completed his course of physical therapy. (Ex. 18). On April 4, 2000, Dr. Radecki, who specializes in neurophysiology and physical medicine, and Dr. Woodward, orthopedist, examined claimant on behalf of the insurer. (Ex. 15). They opined that: (1) claimant had preexisting cervical spondylosis and small disc herniations at C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels; (2) with aging, the personal factors of increasing cervical spondylosis have finally become symptomatic; (3) work did not cause claimant's conditions or complaints; and (4) there is no evidence that claimant's work exposure worsened his underlying pathology. (Ex. 15-5, -6). On May 17, 2000, Dr. Meharry concurred with Drs. Radecki's and Woodward's April 4, 2000 report. (Ex. 19). 54 Van Natta 14 (2002)15After reviewing the record, Dr. Frank also concurred with Drs. Radecki's and Woodward's April 4, 2000 report. (Ex. 20). In addition, Dr. Frank opined that claimant had...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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