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 October 17, 2001. With regard to the amended issue before him, the hearing officer determined that the respondent’s (claimant) compensable injury includes an injury to the left knee. The appellant (carrier) appealed, arguing that the hearing officer’s determination is incorrect, and clearly against the great weight of the evidence. The claimant filed a response, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
There was conflicting evidence presented at the hearing concerning the circumstances of the claimant’s injury. The hearing officer found that the claimant suffered damage or harm to the physical structure of his left knee in a fall at work on __________. Determining the claimant to be credible and believable when testifying, the hearing officer resolved the conflicts in the evidence in favor of the claimant. The testimony and the medical evidence presented at the hearing sufficiently support the hearing officer’s determination that the claimant’s compensable injury includes an injury to the left knee.
It is the hearing officer, as the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence (Section 410.165(a)), who resolves the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence (Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ)), and determines what facts have been established from the conflicting evidence. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company v. Escalera, 385 S.W.2d 477 (Tex. Civ. App.-San Antonio 1964, writ ref’d n.r.e.). This is equally true of medical evidence. Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). The Appeals Panel will not disturb the challenged factual findings of a hearing officer unless they are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust and we do not find them so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951).
The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEM
350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
Philip F. O’Neill – Appeals Judge