This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing (CCH) was held on July 12 , 2001. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issues by deciding that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury on __________, and that the claimant had disability as a result of the compensable injury of __________, from May 31, 2000, through June 18, 2000, and from September 1, 2000, through November 15, 2000. The appellant (carrier) appealed the hearing officer’s decision on the disability issue. No response was received from the claimant. There was no appeal of the hearing officer’s decision that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on __________. In Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 011841, decided September 26, 2001, the Appeals Panel remanded the case to the hearing officer for the hearing officer to obtain a street address from the carrier for the carrier’s registered agent for service of process. See Section 410.164(c). The required information was obtained on remand. The hearing officer made the same determinations in his decision on remand as he did in the original decision. The carrier again appeals the hearing officer’s determination on the disability issue. No response was received from the claimant. There is no appeal of the hearing officer’s determination that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on __________.
DECISION
The hearing officer’s decision on remand is affirmed.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant had disability as a result of her compensable injury of __________, from May 31, 2000, through June 18, 2000, and from September 1, 2000, through November 15, 2000. Section 401.011(16) defines “disability” as “the inability because of a compensable injury to obtain and retain employment at wages equivalent to the preinjury wage.” Conflicting evidence was presented on the disability issue. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). As the finder of fact, the hearing officer resolves the conflicts in the evidence and determines what facts have been established. The hearing officer’s decision on the disability issue is supported by the claimant’s testimony and by the reports of the treating doctor. The hearing officer’s decision is supported by sufficient evidence and is not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986).
The hearing officer’s decision and order on remand are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is TRANSCONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION
350 NORTH ST. PAUL
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
Robert E. Lang
Appeals Panel
Manager/Judge