Your FREE and easy resource for all things Texas workers' compensation
At a Glance:
Title:
APD 010194
Date:
March 15, 2001

APD 010194

March 15, 2001

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 January 9, 2001. The hearing officer determined that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury and that she had disability. Appellant self-insured (“carrier” herein) appealed these determinations on sufficiency grounds and contended that claimant was merely walking when she was injured. Claimant responded that the Appeals Panel should affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.

DECISION

We affirm.

Carrier appeals the injury and disability determinations on sufficiency grounds, contending that claimant was injured while “merely walking.” The matters carrier complained of in this regard concern credibility and fact issues, which were for the hearing officer to consider. We have reviewed the complained-of determinations and we conclude that they are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).

Carrier asserted that the positional risk test of Employers' Casualty Company v.Bratcher, 823 S.W.2d 719 (Tex. App.-El Paso 1992, writ denied), applies. We reject this contention for the same reason stated in Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 990252, decided March 25, 1999. The hearing officer could find from the evidence that this was not a repetitive trauma “mere walking” case and that the employment brought claimant in contact with the risk that caused the injury.

We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.

Judy L. S. Barnes
Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Gary L. Kilgore
Appeals Judge

Thomas A. Knapp
Appeals Judge

Top