Title: 

APD 023254

Significant Decision

Date: 

February 6, 2003

Issues: 

Compensability-Occupationl Inj, Disabilty/Existence-Duration, Timely Reporting to Employer

Table of Contents

APD 023254

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 December 2, 2002. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable repetitive trauma injury to the left hand; that the date of injury is ______________, pursuant to Section 408.007, the date the claimant knew or should have known the disease may be related to the employment; that the respondent (carrier) is relieved from liability under Section 409.002 because of the claimant’s failure to timely notify his employer pursuant to Section 409.001; and that since there is not a compensable injury, there can be no resultant disability, therefore, the claimant did not have disability resulting from a compensable injury. The claimant appealed on sufficiency of the evidence grounds. The carrier responded, urging affirmance.

DECISION

Affirmed.

We have reviewed the complained-of determinations and find that the hearing officer’s Decision and Order is supported by sufficient evidence to be affirmed in its entirety. The issues presented questions 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 Insurance Association 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 Insurance Company 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 are affirmed.

The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ROYAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is

CORPORATION SERVICES COMPANY

800 BRAZOS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.

Daniel R. Barry – Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge

Edward Vilano – Appeals Judge