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 3, 2004. The hearing officer determined that the respondent (claimant) sustained a compensable occupational disease in the form of a repetitive trauma injury. The appellant (self-insured) appealed the hearing officer’s determination on sufficiency of the evidence grounds. The claimant responded, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The claimant testified that she spent 80-90% of her workday typing, and contended that she sustained a compensable injury as a result of the repetitive activity performed in the course and scope of her employment. An occupational disease includes a repetitive trauma injury. Section 401.011(34). The claimant had the burden to prove that she sustained a repetitive trauma injury as defined by Section 401.011(36). Conflicting evidence was presented on this disputed issue. 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 compensability determination is supported by sufficient evidence and is 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 hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is (a self-insured governmental entity) and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
LV
(ADDRESS)
(CITY), TEXAS (ZIP CODE).
Veronica L. Ruberto – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Chris Cowan – Appeals Judge
Edward Vilano – Appeals Judge