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 November 15, 2001. The hearing officer determined that (1) the appellant’s (claimant) post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is not related to the compensable injury of __________; and (2) the claimant did not have disability from October 30 to November 6, 2000. The claimant appeals the determinations, asserting that the hearing officer did not consider the evidence before her and erred in failing to admit Claimant’s Exhibit No. 11. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Reversed and remanded.
EXTENT OF INJURY AND DISABILITY
The claimant asserts that the hearing officer failed to consider the evidence before her and, instead, based her determination on a medical report not admitted in the record of this proceeding. In the “Statement of the Evidence” portion of the decision, the hearing officer states, “Claimant relied upon the medical reports of [Dr. P’s] diagnosis to show that his condition is a result of his compensable injury.” The hearing officer goes on to make repeated references to the reports of Dr. P and states, “As [Dr. P] did not establish a proper basis for his opinion, his opinion should be given little if any weight.” The hearing officer, then, determined that the claimant’s compensable injury did not cause or result in the claimant’s PTSD. Upon review of the record, we found no reports from Dr. P as referenced in the statement of the evidence, nor were such records admitted into evidence in this proceeding. Additionally, the claimant, contrary to the hearing officer’s statement, did not rely on medical records from Dr. P; rather, the claimant presented evidence from Dr. G to show that his PTSD resulted from the compensable injury. We note that Dr. G’s reports were not referenced in the hearing officer’s statement of the evidence.
In Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 93791, decided October 18, 1993, we stated that a hearing officer is not required by the 1989 Act to recite the facts of a case in a “Statement of Evidence.” Notwithstanding, a statement of evidence, if made, must reasonably reflect the evidentiary record. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 013029, decided January 9, 2002. Because the hearing officer’s decision appears to be based on information inconsistent with the evidence in this proceeding, the hearing officer’s decision is reversed and remanded for further consideration consistent with the record evidence. The decision on remand should provide the rationale for determining whether the claimant’s compensable injury extended to include PTSD and whether the claimant had disability in view of the extent-of-injury determination.
ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE
The claimant asserts that the hearing officer erred in refusing to admit Claimant’s Exhibit No. 11-a recording of a prior CCH to determine whether the compensable injury of __________, extended to include the claimant’s neck and back. The claimant contends that the excluded evidence exposes inaccurate statements made in the prior proceeding and explains the manner in which the claimant acquired Claimant’s Exhibit No. 2. Because the claimant had the opportunity to testify with regard to the relevant matters contained in the excluded exhibit, we are satisfied that the hearing officer did not abuse her discretion.
The decision and order of the hearing officer is reversed and remanded for further consideration consistent with the record evidence.
Pending resolution of the remand, a final decision has not been made in this case. However, since reversal and remand necessitate the issuance of a new decision and order by the hearing officer, a party who wishes to appeal from such new decision must file a request for review not later than 15 days after the date on which such new decision is received from the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission’s Division of Hearings, pursuant to Section 410.202, which was amended June 17, 2001, to exclude Saturdays and Sundays and holidays listed in Section 662.003 of the Texas Government Code in the computation of the 15-day appeal and response periods.
The true corporate name of the carrier is ARGONAUT MIDWEST INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
JOSEPH A. YURKOVICH
1431 GREENWAY DRIVE, SUITE 450
IRVING, TEXAS 75038.
Edward Vilano
CONCUR:
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge