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 May 21, 2002. The hearing officer determined that respondent/cross-appellant (claimant) sustained a repetitive trauma injury; that the date of injury is ________________; and that claimant did not timely report his injury. Claimant appealed the determinations regarding date of injury and timely notice on sufficiency grounds. Appellant/cross-respondent North American Specialty Insurance Company (carrier 2) responded that the Appeals Panel should affirm the hearing officer’s determinations regarding date of injury and timely notice. Carrier 2 appealed the determination that claimant sustained a work-related injury. The file does not contain a response from claimant or from respondent Mid-Century Insurance Exchange (carrier 1).
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).
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
According to information provided by carrier 1, the true corporate name of insurance carrier 1 is MID-CENTURY INSURANCE EXCHANGE and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEMS
350 NORTH ST. PAUL
SUITE 2900
AUSTIN, TEXAS 75201.
According to information provided by carrier 2, the true corporate name of insurance carrier 2 is NORTH AMERICAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEMS
350 NORTH ST. PAUL
SUITE 2900
AUSTIN, TEXAS 75201.
Judy L. S. Barnes
CONCUR:
Daniel R. Barry – Appeals Judge
Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge