Newberg v. Armour Food Co.

I dissent from the majority opinion and would affirm the Court of Appeals. Writ*176ing for the Workers’ Compensation Board, Board Member Miller precisely analyzed this case and I adopt his views:

“The AU’s finding and conclusion are inconsistent within themselves. To conclude that a predisposition does not equate with an abnormality is merely bandying with semantics, i.e., a difference without a distinction. Here, the AU found that uniformly the medical evidence was to the effect that Travel-stead had a predisposition to carpal tunnel syndrome. While it could not be objectively demonstrated,…