Title: 

APD 010779

Significant Decision

Date: 

May 14, 2001

Issues: 

Existence of Compensable Inj

Table of Contents

APD 010779

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 22, 2001. The hearing officer determined that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury on __________. The appellant (carrier) urges on appeal that this determination is against the great weight of the evidence. The appeals file contains no response from the claimant.

DECISION

Affirmed.

A “compensable injury” means “an injury that arises out of and in the course and scope of employment for which compensation is payable under this subtitle.” Section 401.011(10). The claimant had the burden to prove he was injured in the course and scope of his employment. Reed v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 535 S.W.2d 377 (Tex. Civ. App.-Beaumont 1976, writ ref’d n.r.e.). In the present case, the hearing officer determined that the claimant sustained a compensable injury. The hearing officer is the trier of fact and is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence and of the weight and credibility to be given to 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. Even if different inferences could be drawn, the Appeals Panel will not disturb the challenged factual findings of a hearing officer unless they are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust and we do not find them to be so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 224 S.W.2d 660 (1951).

The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.

Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge

Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge