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 April 23, 2002. The hearing officer determined that appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on ________________, and that he did not have disability. Claimant appealed these determinations on sufficiency grounds and also contended that the hearing officer did not apply the correct legal standard. Respondent self-insured (carrier herein) responded that the Appeals Panel should affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
DECISION
We affirm.
We have reviewed the complained-of determinations and conclude that the issues involved fact questions for the hearing officer. The hearing officer reviewed the record and decided what facts were established. We conclude that the hearing officer’s determinations are not 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).
Claimant contended that the hearing officer did not apply the correct legal standard in making his determinations in this case. A claimant’s testimony alone is sufficient to establish that an injury can cause disability. Gee v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 765 S.W.2d 394 (Tex. 1989). It is apparent that the hearing officer merely did not find claimant’s testimony to be credible in this case. We perceive no error.
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
According to information provided by carrier, the true corporate name of the insurance carrier is (a certified self-insured) and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
U.S. CORPORATE SERVICES
800 BRAZOS STREET
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.
Judy L. S. Barnes – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge