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 June 22, 2001. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on __________ or __________, and that she did not have disability. The claimant appeals the determinations on sufficiency grounds. The claimant also requests the Appeals Panel issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to the issue of date of injury. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
Compensable Injury
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury. The claimant had the burden to prove that she sustained damage or harm to the physical structure of her body, arising out of and in the course and scope of her employment. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 91028, decided October 23, 1991. There was conflicting evidence presented with regard to this issue. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence (Section 410.165(a)) and, as the trier of fact, resolves the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence including the medical evidence (Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ)). In view of the evidence presented, we cannot conclude that the hearing officer’s determination is 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 (Tex. 1986).
Disability
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant did not have disability. The 1989 Act requires the existence of a compensable injury as a prerequisite to a finding of disability. Section 401.011(16). Because the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury, the hearing officer properly concluded that the claimant did not have a disability.
Date of Injury
As stated above, the claimant requests the Appeals Panel issue findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to the date of injury. The hearing officer determined that the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury on either __________ or __________. Therefore, no further findings of fact or conclusions of law are necessary.
The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
GEORGE MICHAEL JONES
9330 LBJ FREEWAY, SUITE 1200
DALLAS, TEXAS 75243.
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Judy L. S. Barnes – Appeals Judge
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge