Title: 

APD 030249

Significant Decision

Date: 

February 26, 2003

Issues: 

SIBS-8th Quarter

Table of Contents

APD 030249

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 January 15, 2003. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) is not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the eighth quarter. The claimant appeals the determination on sufficiency of the evidence grounds. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.

DECISION

Affirmed.

The claimant attached new evidence to his appeal which would purportedly show that he is entitled eighth quarter SIBs. Documents submitted for the first time on appeal are generally not considered unless they constitute newly discovered evidence. See generally Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 93111, decided March 29, 1993; Black v. Wills, 758 S.W.2d 809 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1988, no writ). Upon our review, the evidence offered is not so material that it would probably produce a different result, nor is it shown that the documents could not have been obtained prior to the hearing below. The evidence, therefore, does not meet the requirements for newly discovered evidence and will not be considered on appeal.

The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant is not entitled to eighth quarter SIBs. Section 408.142 and Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX ADMIN. CODE § 130.102 (Rule 130.102) establish the requirements for entitlement to SIBs. At issue was whether the claimant made a good faith job search commensurate with his ability to work during the qualifying period. It was for the hearing officer, as the trier of fact, to resolve the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence and to determine what facts had been established. Garza v. Commercial Ins. Co., 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). In view of the evidence presented, we cannot conclude that the hearing officer’s determination is 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 (Tex. 1986).

The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.

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

CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY

800 BRAZOS, SUITE 750, COMMODORE 1

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.

Edward Vilano

CONCUR:

Chris Cowan – Appeals Judge

Terri Kay Oliver – Appeals Judge