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 3, 2002. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on ________ and that she did not have disability. The claimant appealed, arguing that the hearing officer’s injury and disability determinations are against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. In its response, the respondent (self-insured) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant had the burden to prove that she sustained a compensable injury. Johnson v. Employers Reinsurance Corp., 351 S.W.2d 936 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1961, no writ). That issue presented a question of fact for the hearing officer to resolve. 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 and manifestly unjust. Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629 (Tex. 1986); Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986).
In this instance, the hearing officer determined that the bus accident described by the claimant occurred; however, she further determined that the accident did not cause damage or harm to the physical structure of the claimant’s body and that it did not result in an injury. The hearing officer was acting within her province as the fact finder in so doing. Our review of the record does not demonstrate that the hearing officer’s determination in that regard is so against the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust; therefore, no sound basis exists for us to reverse the hearing officer’s injury determination on appeal. Pool; Cain.
The 1989 Act requires the existence of a compensable injury as a prerequisite to a finding of disability. Section 401.011(16). Because the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury, the hearing officer properly concluded that the claimant did not have disability.
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
true corporate name of the self-insured is (SELF-INSURED) and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
(SELF-INSURED)
(ADDRESS)
(CITY), TEXAS (ZIP CODE).
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge