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 March 15, 2000. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on __________; and that he did not have disability. The claimant appealed these determinations on sufficiency grounds. The respondent (self-insured) responded that the Appeals Panel should affirm the hearing officer’s decision.
DECISION
We affirm.
Claimant contends the hearing officer erred in determining that he did not sustain a compensable injury and that he did not have disability. The applicable law regarding injury and disability issues and our standard of review are set forth in Johnson v. Employers Reinsurance Corporation, 351 S.W.2d 936 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1961, no writ); Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 92083, decided April 16, 1992; Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); and Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 950456, decided May 9, 1995. We have reviewed the claimant’s brief and the record and we conclude that the hearing officer’s determinations are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain.
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
Judy L. Stephens
CONCUR IN RESULT:
I concur in the result. My review of the record indicates that the evidence is sufficient to support the hearing officer’s decision and order. I note that even though appellate courts are extremely busy, the American Bar Association recently passed a resolution calling for appellate jurists to explain the basis for their decisions. The claimant is no longer represented by an attorney to explain things to him.
Tommy W. Lueders – Appeals Judge
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge