Opinion ID: 1756883
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: the bureau's decision

Text: The findings of fact made by the Bureau, for the most part, pertain to Inglis's prior history of back troubles and treatment, and to the discrepancies in the testimony concerning the date and reporting of the injury. [2] The Bureau also found that the claimant's statements relative to his injury and his preexisting back problems were inconsistent, evasive, and contradictory and are not credible. As a matter of law the Bureau concluded: (1) that the claimant has failed to prove that he suffered an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment; (2) that the claimant has failed to prove that his condition is causally related to an employment injury; and (3) that the claimant has failed to prove that he is entitled to benefits in connection with his condition.