Court Opinion

ID: 9507852
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:25:52.520453+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:24.275831
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE MORRISON,
specially concurring as *462follows:
I concur in the result. However, I would affirm because there is substantial credible evidence to support the Workers’ Compensation Court.
Specifically, I take exception to the language about causation proof. The majority opinion states:
“Medical proof of causation of an injury in a workers’ compensation proceeding must be greater than proof of that which is ‘possible.’ ”
This statement may be misleading. We do permit medical testimony in support of causation proof, to be based upon a “possibility” rather than a “probability”. However, the finder of fact must find that there is a probability that causation exists based upon the medical testimony and all other facts in the record.
Medical testimony based upon a possibility may form the basis for a finding that injury is in fact related to a certain trauma. However, in this case there is substantial credible evidence supporting the Workers’ Compensation Court finding that causation did not exist. Therefore, I concur in the affirmance.