{"id":"alj-G807146-2025-11-04","awcc_number":"G807146","decision_date":"2025-11-04","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Carl Smith","employer_name":"City Of Little Rock","title":"SMITH VS. CITY OF LITTLE ROCK AWCC# G807146 November 04, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:4"],"injury_keywords":["neck","knee","back"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/SMITH_CARL_G807146_20251104.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"SMITH_CARL_G807146_20251104.pdf","text_length":6464,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. G807146 \n \nCARL SMITH, EMPLOYEE      CLAIMANT \nCITY OF LITTLE ROCK            RESPONDENT \nRISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, \nINSURANCE CARRIER/TPA      RESPONDENT \n \n OPINION AND ORDER FILED NOVEMBER 4, 2025 \nThe Hearing before Administrative Law Judge James D. Kennedy was held in \nLittle Rock, Arkansas, on September 16th, 2025. \nClaimant was pro se and failed to appear at the time of the hearing, but did in fact \narrive at the Commission, approximately two hours after the notified start time for \nthe hearing. \nRespondents were represented by Melissa Wood, of Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n A hearing was held in the above styled matter on the 16\nth\n day of September, 2025, \nin Little  Rock,  Arkansas, on Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to prosecute \npursuant  to  Ark. Code  Ann.  11-9-702  and 11  C.A.R. 25 – 110(d) of  the rules  of  the \nArkansas Workers’ Compensation, formally  known  as  Rule  099.13. The Claimant  was \npro-se and failed to appear at the time of the hearing, but did appear at the Commission \napproximately  two hours  after  the  notified start time  for  the  hearing. The Respondents \nwere represented by Melissa Wood of Little Rock, Arkansas, who introduced 9 pages of \ndocuments which were  admitted  into  the evidentiary record. Upon  the  Claimants \nappearance at the Commission approximately two hours late, he was instructed to talk to \nthe  Legal  Advisors  Division  of  the  Commission. A  copy of  an  email from  the  Legal \nAdvisors,  which  is  “Blue  Backed” and  made part  of  this  Opinion, provides that the \n\nCarl Smith – G807146 \n2 \n \nClaimant contended he wished to pursue his claim. An additional email from the Claimant \ndated  September  17,  2025,  is  also “Blue Backed” and  made  part  of this  Opinion.  This \nemail from the Claimant contends that the hearing was originally set for Tuesday, August \n12, 2025, at 1:30 p.m. It went on to contend that “Following my surgery on September 10, \nI reached out to opposing counsel, Ms. Melissa Wood, to confirm the rescheduled date.  \nMs.  Wood  replied  by  email  on  September  10,  2025,  stating  the hearing  would  be  on \nTuesday, September 16, 2025. However, no time was provided in that correspondence.  \n“Since  the  prior  notice  had  listed  1:30  p.m. and the  new  date  fell  on  a  Tuesday,  I \nreasonably assumed the hearing would be at the same time.” The Claimant went on to \nstate that he appeared at 1:00 p.m. “prepared to proceed” and at this point was informed \nthat the hearing had occurred at 11:00 pm.   \n It is also noted that a previous Motion to Dismiss Hearing was held on November \n9, 2021, when the Claimant also failed to appear. An Opinion was issued in regard to this \nprevious Motion to Dismiss on December 5, 2021, where it was found that there was no \nalternative but to grant the Motion to Dismiss without Prejudice. The previous Motion to \nDismiss Opinion is also “Blue Backed” and made part of this Opinion.      \n At the time of the second Motion to Dismiss Hearing on September 16, 2025, the \nRespondents  entered nine pages  of  documents with  index into  the  record. The \ndocuments included a Form C dated October 23, 2018, that provided the Claimant was \nfighting a fire when the ceiling collapsed, resulting in the Claimant injuring his neck and \nknee on October 28, 2016. A First Report of Injury, provided that the date of the injury \nwas January 26, 2023. A Form 2 dated October 26, 2018, provided that the claim was a \nmedical only claim. A Form C filed December 13, 2023, provided that the Claimant was \n\nCarl Smith – G807146 \n3 \n \nperforming  firefighter  operations  and  the  ceiling  collapsed  on  him. The  documents \nentered into the record also included a letter from the Medical Cost Containment Division \nof the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission, dated September 16, 2024, which \nprovided  that  the  Claimant  had  already  exercised  his  right  to  a  one-time change  of \nphysician  on  January  8,  2019, with  Dr. Mark  Miedema, that they  were  aware  that  Dr. \nMiedema had relocated to Northwest Arkansas, and that the Claimant had been referred \nto  his  colleague  Dr.  Stephen  Paulus,  where  the  Claimant  continued  treatment until \nDecember  12,  2023. The  letter  went  on to  provide  that  although  the  Claimant  was  not \nentitled  to  an  additional  change  of  physician, he  could  in  fact  request  a  hearing  for \nadditional medical care. (Emphasis added) A second Motion to Dismiss for Failure to \nProsecute was filed on June 17, 2025, and an appropriate notice to respond to the Motion \nto Dismiss was mailed to the Claimant on June 19, 2025, where the Claimant failed to \nrespond. An appropriate notice of hearing was provided to the Claimant on July 15, 2025, \nproviding Notice of a Hearing in Little Rock, Arkansas on September 16, 2025, at 11:00 \na.m. and  at  the  time  for  that hearing, the  claimant  failed  to  appear. The Respondents \nwere represented by Melissa Wood, who requested that the matter be dismissed pursuant \nto Ark.  Code  Ann.  11- 9-702  and  11  C.A.R.  25-110(d) of  the  Arkansas  Workers’ \nCompensation Commission.   \nORDER \n The Opinion in regard to this matter was delayed in being issued in an attempt to \nprovide additional time for the Claimant to take some additional action, but in reviewing \nthe filings in an attempt to “Blue Back” additional documents that might be appropriate in \nregard  to  the  outcome  of  this  matter,  the  only  pertinent  documents  applicable and \n\nCarl Smith – G807146 \n4 \n \navailable appear to be the ones described above.  It is clear the Claimant was serving the \npeople of Little Rock as a fire fighter, an extremely honorable profession. However, it is \nalso  clear  that  the  Claimant  has  the  burden  of  proof  in  regard  to  pursuing  his  claim.  \nPursuant to the above statement of the case, as well as the documents entered into the \nevidentiary record, statements by  the  Attorney  for  the  Respondents, and the “Blue \nBacked” documents, there is no  alternative  but  to  grant  the Motion  to  Dismiss without \nprejudice pursuant  to 11  CAR  25-110(d) of  the  Arkansas  Workers’  Compensation \nCommission and Ark. Code Ann. 11-9-702.   \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n      ____________________________ \n               JAMES D. KENNEDY \n               ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G807146 CARL SMITH, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT CITY OF LITTLE ROCK RESPONDENT RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER FILED NOVEMBER 4, 2025 The Hearing before Administrative Law Judge James D. Kennedy was held in Little Rock, A...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:34:12.508Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-G807146-2025-11-04","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/SMITH_CARL_G807146_20251104.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}