Opinion
No. 05-05-01431-CV
Opinion filed April 18, 2007.
On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 02-09977-K.
Before Justices WRIGHT, BRIDGES, and MAZZANT.
Opinion by Justice WRIGHT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Regina Hill, acting pro se, appeals the trial court's take nothing judgment on her workers' compensation claim. Following a trial before the court, the trial court entered a judgment affirming the decision of the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Appeals Panel. In two issues, appellant complains there are fact issues regarding whether she timely notified her employer of her injury, was injured during the course and scope of her employment, and was injured on August 1, 2001. We affirm the trial court's judgment.
In her two issues, appellant contends we must reverse the trial court's judgment because certain fact issues preclude summary judgment. However, the record shows this was a trial before the court following which the trial court, without written findings of fact or conclusions of law, affirmed the decision of the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Appeals Panel.
At trial, appellee produced evidence showing appellant had a severe pre-existing back injury. After hearing that and other evidence, the trial court affirmed the decision of the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Appeals Panel finding, among other things, that appellant did not sustain a compensable injury. In her brief, appellant challenges the trial court's determinations (1) of the date of her injury, (2) that she did not timely notify her employer of her injury, and (3) that she was not injured during the course and scope of her employment. She does not contend the trial court erred by determining she did not sustain a compensable injury. An appellant must attack all independent bases or grounds that support a complained-of ruling or judgment. See Midway Nat'l Bank v. W. Texas Wholesale Supply Co., 453 S.W.2d 460, 460-61 (Tex. 1970); Britton v. Tex. Dep't of Criminal Justice, 95 S.W.3d 676, 681 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.). When, as here, an independent ground fully supports the complained-of ruling or judgment, but the appellant assigns no error to that independent ground, then (1) we must accept the validity of that unchallenged independent ground, and (2) any error in the grounds challenged on appeal is harmless because the unchallenged independent ground fully supports the complained-of ruling or judgment. Britton, 95 S.W.3d at 681. Because appellant failed to challenge the trial court's finding that she did not sustain a compensable injury, we accept the validity of that finding and conclude any error in the grounds challenged on appeal is harmless. We overrule appellant's first and second issues.
It is difficult to precisely determine appellant's complaints. Although she makes reference to the existence of a compensable injury in her issue statements, she does not analyze or argue in any meaningful way how the trial court erred by determining that she did not sustain a compensable injury. Thus, we conclude she failed to challenge that determination on appeal.
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.