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 March 2, 2001. With regard to the issues before him, the hearing officer determined that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury on _________; that he timely reported the injury; and that he had disability from April 14, 2000, through October 11, 2000. The appellant (carrier) appeals, contending that the hearing officer’s determinations are against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. There is no response from the claimant.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant testified that he injured his knee when he slipped on a catwalk striking and twisting his knee and that he reported the injury to his supervisor on that day. The hearing officer determined that the claimant’s testimony was credible and that the claimant’s evidence established disability due to the compensable knee injury from April 14, 2000, through October 11, 2000.
There was conflicting evidence presented at the hearing on the issues. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). It was for the hearing officer, as trier of fact, to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701, 702 (Tex. Civ. App.- Amarillo 1974, no writ). In considering all the evidence in the record, we cannot agree that the challenged findings of the hearing officer are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be manifestly wrong and unjust. In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951). We affirm the decision and order.
Philip F. O’Neill
CONCUR:
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge