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 July 8, 2003. The hearing officer determined that the compensable injury of _____________ does not extend to and include facet syndrome and a disc bulge at L2-3, and that the appellant (claimant) does not have disability from February 6, 2003, through the date of the CCH. The claimant appealed, disputing both the extent-of-injury and disability determinations. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
It is undisputed that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on _____________. The claimant testified that he was accidentally pushed by machinery at work and fell against a steel rail injuring his right back and hip. MRIs reveal a disc bulge at L2-3 and degenerative changes to the claimant’s lumbar spine. There is conflicting medical evidence regarding whether these conditions existed prior to the claimant’s compensable injury or was caused by the compensable injury. The claimant denied prior back problems. Extent of injury and disability are factual questions for the fact finder to resolve. Conflicting evidence was presented on these issues. The hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as the weight and credibility that is to be given to the evidence. Section 410.165(a). The hearing officer did not find the claimant’s testimony to be credible. It is for the hearing officer to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). This is equally true of medical evidence. Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286, 290 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). The trier of fact may believe all, part, or none of the testimony of any witness, including that of the claimant. Aetna Insurance Company v. English, 204 S.W.2d 850 (Tex. Civ. App.-Fort Worth 1947, no writ). The evidence supports the hearing officer’s factual determinations. The Appeals Panel will not disturb the challenged factual findings of a hearing officer unless they are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust, and we do not find them to be so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951).
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
LEO F. MALO
12222 MERIT DRIVE, SUITE 700
DALLAS, TEXAS 75251.
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Margaret L. Turner – Appeals Judge
Edward Vilano – Appeals Judge