Your FREE and easy resource for all things Texas workers' compensation
At a Glance:
APD 041444
August 9, 2004

APD 041444

August 9, 2004

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 13, 2004. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issue by deciding that the respondent’s (claimant) ______________, compensable injury includes an injury to her neck. The appellant (carrier) appeals, arguing that the claimant failed to produce credible evidence to support her assertion that the injury includes the cervical region. The appeal file does not contain a response from the claimant.



It is undisputed that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on ______________. The claimant testified that she was walking down the hall reading a stack of papers when she struck her head on a ledge and stumbled backwards several feet before falling. The hearing officer was persuaded that the evidence established that on ______________, the claimant sustained an injury in the course and scope of her employment that included her neck.

Extent of injury is a question of fact for the fact finder to resolve. Conflicting evidence was presented on these issues. The hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as the weight and credibility that is to be given to the evidence. Section 410.165(a). It is for the hearing officer to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). This is equally true of medical evidence. Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286, 290 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ). The trier of fact may believe all, part, or none of the testimony of any witness, including that of the claimant. Aetna Insurance Company v. English, 204 S.W.2d 850 (Tex. Civ. App.-Fort Worth 1947, no writ). The evidence supports the hearing officer's factual determinations. The Appeals Panel will not disturb the challenged factual findings of a hearing officer unless they are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust, and we do not find them to be so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951).

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




Margaret L. Turner
Appeals Judge


Elaine M. Chaney
Appeals Judge

Thomas A. Knapp
Appeals Judge