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 May 15, 2001. With respect to the issues before her, the hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) (1) did not sustain a compensable injury in the form of an occupational disease on __________, (2) did not timely notify her employer of her alleged injury, (3) did not sustain a compensable injury on __________, and (4) did not have disability resulting from a compensable injury. The claimant appeals, contending that the hearing officer’s determinations are against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. The respondent (carrier) responds, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Finding sufficient evidence to support the decision of the hearing officer and no reversible error in the record, we affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
This case turns on credibility of the witnesses. This is an issue of fact. Section 410.165(a) provides that the contested case hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as of the weight and credibility that is to be given the evidence.
The claimant contends there was conflicting evidence from the various witnesses. It was the province of the hearing officer to resolve any conflicting evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). The question under our standard of review is whether the hearing officer’s determinations were 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). Applying this standard, we find sufficient evidence to support the hearing officer’s decision.
The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge