This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing was held on January 5, 2001. With respect to the single issue before her, the hearing officer determined that the appellant’s (claimant) _________, compensable injury did not extend to include bladder dysfunction and impotence. In his appeal, the claimant argues that the hearing officer’s extent-of-injury determination is against the great weight of the evidence. In its response to the claimant’s appeal, the respondent (self-insured) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant’s compensable injury did not extend to bladder dysfunction and impotence. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165. The hearing officer noted that the medical evidence did not support the causal connection between his compensable injury and the complained-of conditions. The hearing officer was acting within her role as the fact finder in determining that the claimant did not sustain his burden of proof on the extent issue. Nothing in our review of the record indicates that the hearing officer’s determination that the compensable injury did not extend to bladder dysfunction and impotence is so against the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Accordingly, no sound basis exists for us to disturb that determination on appeal. Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986); Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Judy L. S. Barnes – Appeals Judge
Philip F. O’Neill – Appeals Judge