This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing (CCH) was held on February 23, 2004. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issues by deciding that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury on ______________, and that he had disability from July 10 through October 13, 2002. The appellant (carrier) appeals, contending that the hearing officer’s determinations on the disputed issues are not supported by the evidence and are against the great weight of the evidence. No response was received from the claimant.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant had the burden to prove that he sustained a compensable injury as defined by Section 401.011(10) and that he had disability as defined by Section 401.011(16). The claimant testified that he injured his back on ______________, while performing his work duties when he stood up and twisted his body to place material on the other side of where he was soldering, and that he returned to work on October 14, 2002, after his treating doctor released him to return to work in a restricted-duty capacity. The treating doctor’s reports, a carrier peer review doctor’s report, and diagnostic test results were in evidence. Conflicting evidence was presented on the disputed issues. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). As the finder of fact, the hearing officer resolves the conflicts in the evidence and determines what facts have been established. In Hanover Insurance Company v. Johnson, 397 S.W.2d 904 (Tex. Civ. App.-Waco 1965, writ ref’d n.r.e.), the court noted that strains, sprains, wrenches, and twists due to unexpected, undesigned or fortuitous events, even where there is no overexertion, and the employee is predisposed to such a lesion, are compensable. Although there is conflicting evidence in this case, we conclude that the hearing officer’s determinations in favor of the claimant on the issues of compensable injury and disability are supported by sufficient evidence and are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986).
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEM
350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Robert W. Potts
CONCUR:
Daniel R. Barry – Appeals Judge
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge