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 29, 2002. The hearing officer decided that the respondent (claimant) was entitled to her fifth and sixth quarters of supplemental income benefits. The appellant (carrier) appeals and argues facts that it says greatly weigh against the decision. The claimant has not responded.
DECISION
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision.
The claimant worked as a flight attendant for her old employer at reduced hours, as recommended by a doctor and in a functional capacity evaluation. Although not expressly articulated in the decision, the hearing officer evidently determined that the claimant had returned to a position relatively equal to her ability to work. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the relevance, the materiality, weight, and credibility of the evidence presented at the hearing. Section 410.165(a). The decision should not be set aside because different inferences and conclusions may be drawn upon review, even when the record contains evidence that would lend itself to different inferences. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). In considering all the evidence in the record, we cannot agree that the findings of the hearing officer are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be manifestly wrong and unjust. In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951). We accordingly affirm the decision and order.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
WILLIAM PARNELL
8144 WALNUT HILL LANE, SUITE 1600
DALLAS, TEXAS 75231.
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Robert E. Lang
Appeals Panel
Manager/Judge
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge