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 March 7, 2018, in (city), Texas, with (administrative law judge) presiding as the administrative law judge (ALJ). The ALJ resolved the disputed issues by deciding that: (1) the compensable injury of (date of injury), does not extend to left carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS); (2) the appellant (claimant) reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) on November 22, 2016; and (3) the claimant’s impairment rating (IR) is zero percent. The claimant appealed, disputing the ALJ’s determinations of extent of injury, MMI, and IR. The respondent (carrier) responded, urging affirmance of the disputed extent of injury, MMI, and IR determinations.
DECISION
Affirmed as reformed.
The claimant testified that he was injured when he was moving and stacking toilet bowls while working as a warehouse worker for the employer. A review of the record reflects that the parties stipulated that on (date of injury), the claimant sustained a compensable injury which the carrier accepted as a left hand, wrist, and forearm strain. However, in Finding of Fact No. 1.D. the ALJ mistakenly found that the carrier accepted a right shoulder sprain/strain. We reform Finding of Fact No. 1.D. to state that the claimant sustained a compensable injury in the form of a left hand strain, a left wrist strain, and a left forearm strain to accurately reflect the stipulation of the parties at the CCH. We note that the ALJ listed the following exhibits as admitted at the CCH: Claimant’s Exhibits: C-1 through C-9; and Carrier’s Exhibits: CR-A through CR-P. A review of the record reflects that only eight exhibits were admitted for the claimant and only exhibits A-O were admitted for the carrier.
In the Decision and Order, the ALJ lists the condition in dispute for the extent-of-injury issue as CTS. However, the Benefit Review Conference Report lists the disputed extent-of-injury condition as left CTS. Additionally, the parties agreed at the CCH that the condition in dispute regarding the extent issue was left CTS. We reform the ALJ’s decision to reflect that the condition in dispute was left CTS. Additionally, the decision of the ALJ determined that the compensable injury of (date of injury), does not extend to CTS. We reform the decision to reflect that the compensable injury of (date of injury), does not extend to left CTS to conform to Finding of Fact No. 3 and Conclusion of Law No. 3.
The ALJ’s determination that the compensable injury does not extend to left CTS is supported by sufficient evidence and is affirmed.
The ALJ’s determination that the claimant reached MMI on November 22, 2016, is supported by sufficient evidence and is affirmed.
The ALJ’s determination that the claimant’s IR is zero percent is supported by sufficient evidence and is affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEM
1999 BRYAN STREET, SUITE 900
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Margaret L. Turner – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Veronica L. Ruberto – Appeals Judge
Carisa Space-Beam – Appeals Judge