54 Van Natta 231 (2002). JOHN W. BRADY, Claimant.

• Case Date: April 25, 2002
• Court: Oregon

Oregon Worker Compensation 2002. 54 Van Natta 231 (2002). JOHN W. BRADY, Claimant 231In the Matter of the Compensation of JOHN W. BRADY, ClaimantWCB Case No. 01-02514ORDER ON REVIEWDale C Johnson, Claimant AttorneysDale C Johnson, SAIF Legal, Defense AttorneysReviewing Panel: Members Phillips Polich, Bock, and Biehl.1 MemberPhillips Polich chose not to sign the order. Claimant requests review of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Stephen Brown's order that upheld the SAIF Corporation's denial of claimant's injury claim for cervical disc conditions. On review, the issue is compensability. We adopt2 and affirm the ALJ's order, with the following supplementation. Claimant argues that Dr. Hacker's opinion establishes that claimant's September 13, 2000 work injury was the major contributing cause of his need for treatment, specifically the surgeries performed on September 22, 2000 and December 28, 2000. We disagree, for two reasons in addition to those set out by the ALJ. First, to the extent that Dr. Hacker addressed the cause of claimant's initial (September 2000) need for surgery separately from his later need for surgery, the doctor stated that the size of claimant's September 2000 C4-5 herniation alone (i.e., without contribution from his congenitally small spinal canal) would be "sufficient to cause spinal cord compression." (Ex. 32-2). In our view, this reasoning establishes only the possibility that the injury caused claimant's September 2000 need for treatment. See Gormley v. SAIF, 52 Or App 1055 (1981) (medical opinion expressed as mere possibility insufficient to prove claim). Moreover, the record as a whole...