Title: 

APD 012134

Significant Decision

Date: 

October 18, 2001

Issues: 

Extent of Injury

Table of Contents

APD 012134

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 begun on June 6, 2001, and was continued until August 1, 2001. The appellant (carrier) appeals the hearing officer’s determination that the respondent’s (claimant) original injury of __________,extends to and includes the claimant’s right shoulder and bilateral wrists. The claimant responds to the appeal, urging the sufficiency of the evidence to support the hearing officer’s decision.

DECISION

Affirmed.

The evidence supports the hearing officer’s factual determination. We would caution that while chronology alone does not establish a causal connection between an accident and a later-diagnosed injury (Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 94231, decided April 8, 1994), neither does a delayed manifestation nor the failure to immediately mention an injury to a health care provider necessarily rule out a connection. See Texas Employers Insurance Company v. Stephenson, 496 S.W.2d 184 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1973, no writ). Generally, lay testimony establishing a sequence of events which provides a strong, logically traceable connection between the event and the condition is sufficient proof of causation. Morgan v. Compugraphic Corp., 675 S.W.2d 729, 733 (Tex. 1984).

The hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as the weight and credibility that is to be given to the evidence. Section 410.165(a). It is for the hearing officer to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). The Appeals Panel will not disturb the challenged factual findings of a hearing officer unless they are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust, and we do not find them to be so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951).

The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.

The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is TEXAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND (effective September 1, 2001, the true corporate name of the insurance carrier is TEXAS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY) and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is

MR. RUSSELL R. OLIVER, PRESIDENT

221 WEST 6TH STREET

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.

Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge

Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge