This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing (CCH) was held on March 30, 2000. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) sustained a compensable ankle injury on __________; that the injury does not extend to include an injury to the low back; and that claimant had disability only from November 2, 1999, through November 15, 1999. Claimant appealed the adverse determinations regarding extent of injury and the length of the disability, asserting that her disability continues. Respondent (carrier) responded that the hearing officer’s determinations are supported by the evidence.
DECISION
We affirm.
Claimant contends the hearing officer erred in determining that her compensable injury did not extend to include her low back. Claimant also complains that the hearing officer ended disability on November 15, 1999, and asserts that her disability continues. The hearing officer summarized the evidence and set forth her analysis and we will not repeat it here. The applicable law and our standard of review are set forth in Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 000433, decided April 12, 2000; Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 000196, decided March 20, 2000; Johnson v. Employers Reinsurance Corporation, 351 S.W.2d 936 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1961, no writ); and Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986). We have reviewed the record, the hearing officer’s decision, and the briefs, and we conclude that the hearing officer’s determinations regarding extent of injury and disability are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain.
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
Judy L. Stephens
CONCUR:
Tommy W. Lueders – Appeals Judge
Dorian E. Ramirez – Appeals Judge