Albert v. Roadway Express

I dissent in part. My de novo review of the judgment appealed convinces me that the workers’ compensation judge plainly erred in his interpretation of the evidence, particularly the expert testimony of Dr. Connolly, and that the judgment should be *755reversed insofar as it dismisses Mr. Albert’s claim.

The evidence plainly demonstrates that not only is there is genuine issue of material fact as to a causal connection between Mr. Albert’s work-related injury and the recurrent disc herniation, but that the evidence predominates in favor of such a causal connection. Dr. Connolly testified that Mr.…