71 Van Natta 1269 (2019)
In the Matter of the Compensation of KEVIN J. MCNAMARA, Claimant
WCB No. 17-04550
Oregon Worker Compensation
November 6, 2019
Welch
Bruun & Green, Claimant Attorneys
SAIF
Legal Salem, Defense Attorneys
Reviewing Panel: Members Lanning and Woodford.
ORDER ON REVIEW
The
SAIF Corporation requests review of Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) Sencer’s order that set aside its denial of
claimant’s new/omitted medical condition claim for
complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) of his right foot and
ankle. On review, the issue is compensability.
We
adopt and affirm the ALJ’s order with the following
supplementation.
To
establish the compensability of his CRPS condition as a
consequential condition, claimant must prove that the
condition exists and that his compensable injury, or its
reasonable and necessary treatment, is the major contributing
cause of the claimed condition. ORS 656.005(7)(a)(A); ORS
656.266(1); Barrett Bus. Servs. v. Hames, 130 Or App
190, 193, rev den, 320 Or 492 (1994) (when
reasonable and necessary treatment of a compensable injury is
the major contributing cause of a new condition, the
compensable injury itself is deemed the major contributing
cause of the consequential condition); Cecelia N.
Jacobson, [70 Van Natta 970], 978 (2018) (same);
Robert D. Harrington, [68 Van Natta 496], 498 (2016)
(applying Maureen Y. Graves, [57 Van Natta 2380],
2381 (2005), to a new/omitted medical condition claim based
on a “consequential condition” theory).
Because
of the disagreement between experts regarding the existence
of the CRPS condition, this claim presents a complex medical
question that must be resolved by expert medical evidence.
See Barnett v. SAIF, 122 Or App 279, 282 (1993). We
give more weight to medical opinions that are well reasoned
and based on complete information. Somers v. SAIF,
77 Or App 259, 263 (1986).
In
setting aside SAIF’s denial, the ALJ found that the
opinion of Dr. Sdrulla, an anesthesiologist and pain
management specialist, persuasively established that
claimant’s CRPS condition of his right foot and ankle
exists and that the compensable injury (i.e., the
accepted condition of anterior right foot contusion) [71 Van
Natta 1270]...
