Title: 

APD 022207

Significant Decision

Date: 

September 18, 2002

Issues: 

Extent of Injury

Table of Contents

APD 022207

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 July 22, 2002. The hearing officer determined that the appellant’s (claimant) ________ compensable blunt force trauma injury to his chest does not extend to and include his diagnosed post-traumatic pneumonia. The claimant appealed on sufficiency of the evidence grounds, and the respondent (self-insured) responded urging affirmance.

DECISION

Affirmed.

We have reviewed the complained-of determination and find that the hearing officer’s Decision and Order is supported by sufficient evidence to be affirmed. The issue regarding the extent of the claimant’s compensable injury 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). Because causation of the claimant’s condition is not within common knowledge, expert medical evidence to a reasonable degree of medical probability was required for the claimant to meet his burden of proof. Houston General Insurance Company v. Pegues, 514 S.W.2d 492 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1974, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 970083, decided February 28, 1997. There was conflicting evidence presented on the disputed issue. 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., 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 determination is 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 that determination on appeal. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).

We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.

The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is (a self-insured governmental entity) and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is

PRESIDENT & CEO (ADDRESS)

(CITY), TEXAS (ZIP CODE).

Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge

Margaret L. Turner – Appeals Judge