No. 07-02750. WILLIAM E. WARNOCK, Claimant.

• Court: Oregon

Oregon Worker Compensation 2008. No. 07-02750. WILLIAM E. WARNOCK, Claimant In the Matter of the Compensation of WILLIAM E. WARNOCK, ClaimantWCB Case No. 07-02750ORDER ON REVIEWBailey and Yarmo LLP, Claimant Attorneys Reinisch Mackenzie PC, Defense AttorneysReviewing Panel: Members Lowell and Weddell.The insurer requests review of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Fisher's order that set aside its denial of claimant's injury claim for a neck/upper back condition. On review, the issue is compensability. We adopt and affirm the ALJ's order with the following supplementation. Claimant was a construction worker whose duties on February 27, 2007 included lifting and moving wood of various shapes and sizes. Claimant experienced "normal" muscle tension and soreness at the end of that workday. The next morning, claimant noticed increasing pain in his shoulders and arms. Claimant sought emergency room treatment and was advised to follow up with a neurosurgeon. Claimant began treating with Dr. Yundt, a neurosurgeon. After a cervical MRI showed a disc herniation at C7-T1, Dr. Yundt recommended surgery. Dr. Yundt performed an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion at C7-T1 on April 5, 2007. The insurer denied claimant's injury claim on April 30, 2007. Claimant requested a hearing. Finding that the medical evidence persuasively established that claimant's work activities were at least a material contributing cause of his disability and need for treatment, the ALJ set aside the insurer's denial. On review, the insurer contends that Dr. Yundt's opinion supporting compensability is less persuasive than those of Drs. Swanson and Dickerman, which do not support compensability. We disagree with the insurer's contention. To establish the compensability of his industrial injury, claimant must prove that his work activities were a material contributing cause of his disability or need for treatment. ORS 656.005(7)(a); ORS 656.266(1); Olson v. State Indus. Accident Comm'n, 222 Or 407, 414-15 (1960); Albany Gen. Hosp. v. Gasperino, 113 Or App 415 (1992).[1] Because of the delay in onset of symptoms, the lack of a clearly identifiable injurious event, and disagreement between experts regarding the cause of claimant's herniation, causation is a complex medical question to be resolved by expert medical evidence. Barnett v. SAIF, 122 Or App 279, 283 (1993). When presented...