In re Compensation of Garcia-Carrillo, 060221 ORWC, 19-05918

Docket NºWCB 19-05918
Case DateJune 02, 2021
CourtOregon
73 Van Natta 470 (2021)
In the Matter of the Compensation of ANDRES GARCIA-CARRILLO, Claimant
WCB No. 19-05918
Oregon Worker Compensation
June 2, 2021
          Jodie Phillips Polich, Claimant Attorneys           SAIF Legal Salem, Defense Attorneys           Reviewing Panel: Members Ousey and Curey.          ORDER ON REVIEW          Claimant requests review of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Jacobson’s order that upheld the SAIF Corporation’s denial of claimant’s occupational disease claim for a right shoulder condition. On review, the issue is compensability.          We adopt and affirm the ALJ’s order with the following supplementation.1          The ALJ found that the record did not persuasively establish the compensability of claimant’s occupational disease claim. Accordingly, the ALJ upheld SAIF’s denial.          On review, claimant contends that the record persuasively establishes that his right shoulder condition is compensable. Based on the following reasoning, we disagree with claimant’s contention.          To establish a compensable occupational disease, claimant must prove that employment conditions were the major contributing cause of the disease. See ORS 656.266(1); ORS 656.802(2)(a). Employment conditions were the "major contributing cause" if they contributed to the disease more than all other causes combined. See Bowen v. Fred Meyer Stores, 202 Or.App. 558, 563-64 (2005); Dietz v. Ramuda, 130 Or.App. 397, 401-402 (1994).          Because of the conflicting opinions regarding the cause of claimant’s right shoulder condition, the causation issue presents a complex medical question that must be resolved by expert medical opinion. See Barnett v. SAIF, 122 Or.App. 279, [73 Van Natta 471] 282 (1993); Matthew C. Aufmuth, 62 Van Natta 1823, 1825 (2010). More weight is given to those medical opinions that are well reasoned and based on complete information. See Somers v. SAIF, 77 Or.App. 259, 263 (1986); Linda E. Patton, 60 Van Natta 579, 582 (2008).          Here, claimant relies on the opinions of Drs. Roehrich and Bert. (Exs. 49, 53A)...

To continue reading

Request your trial