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 August 22, 2001. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issues by concluding that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on ____________, and does not have disability resulting from the injury sustained on ____________. The claimant appeals, arguing that the findings and conclusions are against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. The respondent (carrier) replies, urging that the fact findings and conclusions asserted as erroneous by the claimant are supported by sufficient evidence.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant was employed as a forklift driver for a box printing company. He testified that on ______________, as he was driving a forklift to load a conveyor he ran over an uneven hole. The claimant testified that he was using his left leg to operate the brakes and he felt a sharp pain in the lower part of his back. The medical records in evidence reflect that the claimant was injured while sitting on a forklift and that he suddenly developed some low back pain, which radiated to his leg. Further, the records reflect that the claimant had a history of low back pain and sciatica in 1999. An additional medical record dated July 19, 2000, states that trauma was denied. The claimant testified that he went to the emergency room on July 27, 2000, because of a headache. The medical records from July 27, 2000, report that the claimant had no back pain.
The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility to be given to the evidence and the relevance and materiality to assign to the evidence. Section 410.165(a). As the fact finder, the hearing officer is charged with the responsibility of resolving the conflicts in the evidence, including the medical evidence. Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App. -Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). The hearing officer may believe all, none, or any part of the testimony of a witness and may properly decide what weight he should assign to the evidence before him. Campos. The question under our standard of review is whether the hearing officer’s determinations are 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). Applying this standard, we find sufficient evidence to support the hearing officer’s finding that the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury on ____________, and does not have disability resulting from the injury sustained on ____________.
The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is TRANSPORT INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CYNTHIA L. CAMPBELL
4100 HARRY HINES BLVD.
DALLAS, TEXAS 75219.
Philip F. O’Neill – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge