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 July 19, 2004. The hearing officer determined that the compensable injury of _______________, does not include the cervical spine MRI findings dated August 4, 2003; the lumbar spine MRI findings dated August 4, 2003; the bilateral elbows; acute infective polyneuritis; and/or an aggravation of talipes equinovarus (right club foot). The appellant (claimant) appeals on sufficiency of the evidence grounds. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.

DECISION

Affirmed.

The hearing officer did not err in making the complained-of determination. The determination regarding extent of injury involved 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)) and, as the trier of fact, resolves the conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence, including the medical evidence (Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Campos, 666 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no writ)). In view of the evidence presented, we cannot conclude that the hearing officer's determination regarding extent of injury is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).

The decision and order of the hearing officer 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

SF

(ADDRESS)

(CITY), TEXAS (ZIP CODE).

Daniel R. Barry

CONCUR:

Gary L. Kilgore
Appeals Judge

Thomas A. Knapp
Appeals Judge