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 November 7, 2001. With respect to the issues before her, the hearing officer determined that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable mental trauma injury on ____________, and that he had disability from December 4, 2000, through the date of the hearing. The appellant (carrier) appeals those determinations on sufficiency grounds. The claimant responds, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant sustained a compensable mental trauma injury on ____________. It is well-settled that mental trauma, even without an accompanying physical injury, can produce a compensable injury if it arises in the course and scope of employment and can be traced to a definite time, place, and cause. Bailey v. American Gen. Ins. Co., 279 S.W.2d 315 (Tex. 1955); Olson v. Hartford Accident and Indem. Co., 477 S.W.2d 859 (Tex. 1972). The issues of whether the claimant sustained a compensable injury and whether he had disability as a result were questions of fact for the hearing officer. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence and of its weight and credibility. Section 410.165(a). The hearing officer resolves conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence and decides what facts the evidence has established. Texas Employers Ins. Ass’n v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). When reviewing a hearing officer’s decision, we will reverse such decision only if it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986).
The carrier contends that the hearing officer’s injury and disability determinations are against the great weight of the evidence. In so arguing, the carrier emphasizes the same factors on appeal as it emphasized at the hearing. The significance, if any, of those factors was a matter left to the hearing officer in determining whether the claimant had sustained his burden of proving injury and disability. The hearing officer resolved the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence in favor of the claimant and she was acting within her province as the fact finder in so doing. Our review of the record does not demonstrate that the challenged determinations are so contrary to the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Therefore, no sound basis exists for us to reverse them on appeal. Cain; Pool.
The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION
350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
Terri Kay Oliver – Appeals Judge