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 May 31, 2001. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issue by deciding that the compensable injury sustained by the respondent (claimant) on __________, does include left carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The appellant (carrier) appealed, and there is no response from the claimant.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant’s __________, compensable injury does include left CTS. The parties stipulated that the claimant sustained a compensable injury to her left wrist on __________. The claimant testified as to the symptoms she was experiencing, and submitted medical records into evidence to support her claim that she suffered left CTS as a result of her compensable injury.
This is an extent-of-injury case, and the Appeals Panel has held that the question of extent of injury is a question of fact for the hearing officer to resolve. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 93613, decided August 24, 1993. Section 410.165(a) provides that the hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as of the weight and credibility that is to be given the evidence. It was for the hearing officer, as trier of fact, to resolve any inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). This is equally true regarding medical evidence. Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). Nothing in our review of the record indicates that the challenged determination 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 the hearing officer’s determination on appeal. Pool v. Ford Motor Company, 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986); Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
Accordingly, the hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge