Your FREE and easy resource for all things Texas workers' compensation
At a Glance:
APD 041791
August 30, 2004

APD 041791

August 30, 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 June 28, 2004. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) did not sustain a compensable injury on _____________, and that because the claimant had not sustained a compensable injury, he did not have disability.

The claimant appealed, contending that his testimony and medical evidence was contrary to the hearing officer’s decision. The respondent (carrier) responded, urging affirmance.



The claimant, a maintenance technician at an apartment complex, testified that he injured his left ankle/foot moving a washer and dryer on _____________. There was conflicting evidence regarding what the claimant was doing on _____________, whether residents signed work orders, and whether the claimant had complained of left ankle/foot problems in January 2004. The claimant first sought medical attention on February 18, 2004.

The questions of whether the claimant sustained a compensable injury and whether he had disability presented questions 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 fact finder, the hearing officer was charged with the responsibility of resolving the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence and deciding what facts the evidence had established. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). The hearing officer was acting within her province as the fact finder in resolving the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence against the claimant. Nothing in our review of the record reveals that the challenged determinations are so against the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986). Accordingly, no sound basis exists for us to disturb those determinations on appeal.

The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.

The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is




Thomas A. Knapp


Gary L. Kilgore
Appeals Judge

Veronica L. Ruberto
Appeals Judge