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 18, 2001. The hearing officer determined that the respondent (claimant) was entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the 14th quarter. The appellant (carrier) has appealed this determination on sufficiency-of-the-evidence grounds. The claimant responded, urging that the hearing officer’s determination be affirmed.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant testified that he was paid SIBs for the previous 13 quarters; that between the 13th and 14th quarters there was substantially no change in his circumstances; that during the qualifying period he was working between 30 to 50 hours per week demonstrating products, earning $59.50 for each demo; that each demo required a significant amount of set-up time; and that he was working within the restrictions the doctors had given him.
The hearing officer made findings of fact which indicate that he believed that the claimant was working in a position which is relatively equal to his ability to work. See Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 992668, decided January 13, 2000, and Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 001062, decided June 29, 2000, which discuss Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 130.102(d) (Rule 130.102(d)), return to work in a position which is relatively equal to the injured employee’s ability to work, and part-time work.
The evidence supports the hearing officer’s factual determination that the claimant is entitled to SIBs for the 14th quarter. The hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as the weight and credibility that is to be given to the evidence. Section 410.165(a). Entitlement to SIBs is a question for the fact finder. It is for the hearing officer to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, 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 to be 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 hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY
800 BRAZOS, SUITE 750, COMMODORE 1
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge