Title: 

APD 012051

Significant Decision

Date: 

October 19, 2001

Issues: 

Disabilty/Existence-Duration, Extent of Injury

Table of Contents

APD 012051

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 August 14, 2001. With respect to the issues before her, the hearing officer determined that the respondent’s (claimant) compensable injury includes bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and bilateral cubital tunnel syndrome and that the claimant had disability, as a result of his compensable injury, from ____________ to November 15, 2000, and from June 26, 2001, through the date of the hearing. In its appeal, the appellant (carrier) argues that the hearing officer’s injury and disability determinations are against the great weight of the evidence. In his response to the carrier’s appeal, the claimant urges affirmance.

DECISION

Affirmed.

The issues of whether the claimant sustained a compensable injury and whether he had disability were questions of fact for the hearing officer. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence and of its weight and credibility. Section 410.165(a). The hearing officer resolves conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence and decides what facts the evidence has established. Texas Employers Ins. Ass’n v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). Generally, injury and disability may be proven by the testimony of the claimant alone, if it is believed by the hearing officer. Gee v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 765 S.W.2d 394 (Tex. 1989). When reviewing a hearing officer’s decision, we will reverse such decision only if it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986).

The carrier contends that the hearing officer’s injury and disability determinations are against the great weight of the evidence. In so arguing, the carrier emphasizes the same factors on appeal as it emphasized at the hearing. The significance, if any, of those factors was a matter left to the hearing officer in determining whether the claimant had sustained his burden of proof on each issue. The hearing officer resolved the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence in favor of the claimant, and she was acting within her province as the fact finder in so doing. Our review of the record does not demonstrate that the challenged determinations are so contrary to the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Therefore, no sound basis exists for us to reverse the injury and disability determinations on appeal. Cain; Pool.

The hearing officer’s decision and order 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.

Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge

Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge