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 June 20, 2001. He determined that respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable repetitive trauma; that the date of injury was ______________; and that claimant had disability beginning on January 23, 2001, and continuing through the date of the hearing. The appellant (carrier) contends on appeal that these determinations are not supported by the evidence and that the hearing officer erred in adding the date-of-injury issue. The appeals file contains no response from claimant.
DECISION
We affirm.
Carrier first contends that the hearing officer erred in adding the issue regarding date of injury. There was no error in the determination of the date of injury in this case. Additionally, even if there was error, any possible error would be harmless.
Carrier contends the hearing officer erred in determining that claimant sustained a compensable injury. The hearing officer’s determinations that claimant sustained a compensable repetitive trauma injury and that claimant had disability resulting from the injury are supported by the evidence. Similarly, whether claimant’s activities were sufficiently repetitive to cause the carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and whether the CTS rendered claimant unable to obtain or retain employment at her preinjury wage were also factual determinations for the hearing officer to resolve. The hearing officer found for claimant on these disputed issues, and such findings are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CORPORATE SERVICES COMPANY
800 BRAZOS
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.
Judy L. S. Barnes
CONCUR:
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
CONCUR IN THE RESULT:
Philip F. O’Neill – Appeals Judge