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 September 18, 2001. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) had not sustained a compensable (standing/walking) repetitive trauma injury and that the claimant did not have disability.
The claimant appeals, asserting that he had no prior history of foot or heel problems and that prior case precedent should be disregarded. The respondent (carrier) responds, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant was employed as a security guard working in a two-building medical facility. How much of his time was spent walking/patrolling is in dispute; however, the hearing officer’s finding that the claimant “was required to stand/walk during a significant portion of each shift” is certainly supported by the evidence. The hearing officer went on to find that the “degree of standing/walking required of the Claimant was not so excessive or unusual as to remove this case from an ordinary disease of life.”
The hearing officer requested that both parties provide Appeals Panel decisions that support their respective positions and, he specifically asked for authority of when standing/walking is out of the ordinary. Both parties cited cases which supported their positions but neither party specifically answered the hearing officer’s question. We would cite Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 980352, decided April 6, 1998, a case where a prison guard, whose entire shift consisted of standing/walking, was required, because of exigent circumstances, to work 50% more than normal (from 8 hours to 12 hours a shift) for 10 consecutive days, as being such a case. The Appeals Panel affirmed the hearing officer’s decision finding compensability in that case.
In the instant case, the hearing officer did not err in his application of the law and his decision is 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).
The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
GEORGE MICHAEL JONES
9330 LBJ FREEWAY, SUITE 1200
DALLAS, TEXAS 75243.
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge