This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing (CCH) was held on April 21, 2004. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issues by deciding that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable injury on ________________, and had disability beginning on April 17, 2003, and continuing through the date of the CCH. The appellant (carrier) appealed, disputing the injury and disability determinations.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant had the burden to prove that he sustained a compensable injury as defined by Section 401.011(10) and that he had disability as defined by Section 401.011(16). Generally, in workers’ compensation cases, the issues of injury and disability may be established by the claimant’s testimony. Houston General Insurance Company v. Pegues, 514 S.W.2d 492 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1974, writ ref’d n.r.e.).The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). As the finder of fact, the hearing officer resolves the conflicts in the evidence and determines what facts have been established. Although there is conflicting evidence in this case, we conclude that the hearing officer’s determinations that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on ________________, and that he had disability beginning on April 17, 2003, through the date of the CCH, are supported by sufficient evidence and are not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986).
The carrier argues that the claimant’s inability to earn preinjury wages is solely due to his immigration status. Whether disability existed for any period of time presented a question of fact for the hearing officer to decide and could be proved by the testimony of the claimant alone if found credible. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 93560, decided August 19, 1993. We have held that a compensable injury need only be a producing cause of the disability, not the only cause. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 931117, decided January 21, 1994.
The carrier also argues that the hearing officer’s decision is not specific enough for the carrier to determine what the temporary income benefit rate should be and requests that the decision be remanded. We note that there was no issue of average weekly wage before the hearing officer and that he answered the issues before him which were in dispute.
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION
350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Margaret L. Turner
CONCUR:
Veronica L. Ruberto – Appeals Judge
Edward Vilano – Appeals Judge