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 March 7, 2002. As to the disputed issues currently under appeal, the hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on _____________; that the claimant did not sustain any disability as a result of the claimed injury of _____________; and that the respondent (carrier) is relieved of liability under Section 409.002 because of the claimant’s failure to timely notify his employer pursuant to Section 409.001 with no good cause having been shown. The claimant appealed on sufficiency grounds. The carrier responded, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
We have reviewed the complained-of determinations and find that the hearing officer’s decision is supported by sufficient evidence to be affirmed in its entirety. The issues presented a question of fact for the hearing officer. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a); Texas Employers Ins. Ass’n v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). There was conflicting evidence presented on the disputed issues. It was for the hearing officer, as the trier of fact, to resolve the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence and to determine what facts had been established. Garza v. Commercial Ins. Co. of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). Nothing in our review of the record reveals that the hearing officer’s determinations are so contrary to the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. As such, no sound basis exists for us to reverse those determinations on appeal. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
The hearing officer’s decision and order is 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.
Daniel R. Barry – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge