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 October 12, 2000. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on or about _________, and did not have disability. The claimant appealed the adverse determinations on the grounds of sufficiency of the evidence. The respondent (self-insured) filed a response urging affirmance and objected to additional evidence offered by the claimant on appeal.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant attached to her request for review certain medical billing documents which were not offered into evidence at the CCH. The Appeals Panel is generally constrained to consider only the evidence of the hearing developed below with certain exceptions not applicable here. Section 410.203(a).
The parties offered conflicting evidence as to whether the claimant sustained an injury to her neck, right shoulder and back on _________, or whether she was merely experiencing the re-manifestation of symptoms from a prior injury. The claimant asserted she sustained an injury to her neck, right shoulder and back when a student grabbed her from behind and put her full weight on the claimant as she wrapped her arms around the claimant’s shoulders. The claimant contended that an injury to her neck and back sustained in 1988 were aggravated by the incident on _________. The self-insured contended that the claimant had been receiving treatment for the _________ injury, which was described as an aggravation of the claimant’s underlying degenerative disc disease, an ordinary disease of life, and that she was merely continuing to experience the effects of the degenerative process and the _________ injury.
The 1989 Act provides that the hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). Where there are conflicts in the evidence, the hearing officer resolves the conflicts and determines what facts the evidence has established. As an appeals body, we will not substitute our judgment for that of the hearing officer when the determination is not so against the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 950456, decided May 9, 1995. The hearing officer may believe all, part, or none of the testimony of any witness.
After review of the record and the evidence adduced at the CCH, we conclude that the hearing officer’s determinations are supported by sufficient evidence and that they are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Pool v. Ford Motor Company, 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986).
Disability means the “inability because of a compensable injury to obtain and retain employment at wages equivalent to the preinjury wage.” Section 401.011(16). Disability, by definition, depends upon there being a compensable injury. Id. Since we have found the evidence to be sufficient to support the determination that the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury, the claimant cannot have disability.
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
Kathleen C. Decker – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
Judy L. Stephens – Appeals Judge