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 September 4, 2001. The hearing officer resolved the sole issue before him by determining that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury on __________. The appellant (self-insured) appeals, asserting that the hearing officer’s determination is not supported by sufficient evidence. There is no response from the claimant in the file.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant is employed as a community liaison for the self-insured. On __________, a student at one of the self-insured’s schools collapsed and the claimant rushed to assist her. The claimant could not identify one specific movement which caused him to injure his low back, but he speculated that it could have occurred when he “jerked” himself up from a kneeling position. The claimant testified that he felt the onset of symptoms when he arrived home that evening and that he was unable to obtain medical treatment until February 8, 2001.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on __________. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). Whether or not the claimant sustained a compensable injury was generally a question of fact for the hearing officer to decide. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 93449, decided July 21, 1993. We do not believe it was necessary for the claimant to identify one specific motion or movement which was the singular cause of his injury, especially when he was in the act of performing a number of motions and movements in an effort to resuscitate the child, who later died. Additionally, the claimant submitted evidence from his treating doctor, who opined that the claimant sustained lumbar radiculitis, lumbar disk disorder with myelopathy, and secondary neck pain as a result of the events of __________.
Nothing in our review of the records indicates that the hearing officer’s determination is so against the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Pool v. Ford Motor Company, 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986); Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is (SELF-INSURED) and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
Philip F. O’Neill – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Judy L. S. Barnes – Appeals Judge
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge