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 21, 2004. With respect to the issue before him, the hearing officer determined that the respondent’s (claimant) compensable injury of ______________, includes an injury to the left knee after February 2002. In its appeal, the appellant (carrier) argues that the hearing officer’s extent-of-injury determination is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be manifestly erroneous and unjust. The appeal file does not contain a response to the carrier’s appeal from the claimant.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant’s compensable injury of ______________, includes an injury to the left knee after February 2002. That issue presented a question of fact for the hearing officer to resolve. The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). As the trier of fact, the hearing officer resolves the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence and decides what facts the evidence has established. Texas Employers Ins. Ass’n v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). There was conflicting evidence on the disputed issue and the hearing officer was acting within his province as the fact finder in giving more weight to the evidence tending to demonstrate the causal connection between the injury to the left knee subsequent to February 2002 and the claimant’s compensable injury. Nothing in our review of the record reveals that the challenged determination is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Accordingly, no sound basis exists for us to reverse that determination on appeal. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986).
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEM
350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Michael B. McShane
Appeals Panel
Manager/Judge
CONCUR:
Daniel R. Barry – Appeals Judge
Edward Vilano – Appeals Judge