{"id":"alj-H003658-2023-03-08","awcc_number":"H003658","decision_date":"2023-03-08","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Lavar Hughes","employer_name":"Crouse Logging Co., Inc","title":"HUGHES VS. CROUSE LOGGING CO., INC. AWCC# H003658 MARCH 8, 2023","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:4","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/HUGHES_LAVAR_H003658_20230308.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"HUGHES_LAVAR_H003658_20230308.pdf","text_length":5315,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H003658 \n \nLAVAR HUGHES, \nEMPLOYEE CLAIMANT \n \nCROUSE LOGGING CO., INC., \nEMPLOYER RESPONDENT \n \nPRAETORIAN INS. CO./ \nMIDWESTERN INS. ALLIANCE, LLC, \nCARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION AND ORDER TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE \nFILED MARCH 8, 2023 \n \nHearing conducted on Wednesday, March 8, 2023, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Little Rock, \nPulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Mr. Lavar Hughes, is represented by the Honorable Philip M. Wilson, Attorney at \nLaw, Pulaski County, Arkansas. Neither the claimant nor his attorney appeared at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable Allison Scott, Anderson, Murphy & \nHopkins, Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n A hearing was conducted on Wednesday, March 8, 2023, to determine whether this claim \nshould be dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a)(4) (2022 \nLexis Replacement) and Commission Rule 099.13 (2022 Lexis Replacement). This hearing was \nrescheduled from January 31, 2023, due to inclement weather. \n The respondents filed a motion to dismiss with the Commission on November 30, 2022, \nrequesting this claim be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Pursuant to the applicable law, both the \nclaimant and his attorney were mailed a copy of the respondents’ motion to dismiss and the subject \nhearing notice in advance of the hearing. The United States Postal Service’s (USPS), First Class \nMail, Return Receipt demonstrates the claimant received notice of the original hearing date via \n\nLavar Hughes, AWCC No. H003658 \n \n2 \n \ncertified mail on January 5, 2023. (Commission Exhibit 1). The Commission’s file indicates that \nboth the claimant’s and respondents’ attorneys received notice of the rescheduled February 8, \n2023, hearing date via email dated February 6, 2023. \n The record herein consists of the hearing transcript and any and all exhibits contained therein \nand attached thereto, as well as the Commission’s entire file in this matter. \nDISCUSSION \n Consistent with Ark. Code Ann.§ 11-9-702(a)(4), as well as our court of appeals’ ruling in \nDillard vs. Benton County Sheriff’s Office, 87 Ark. App. 379, 192 S.W.3d 287 (Ark. App. 2004), \nthe Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing on the respondents’ motion to dismiss. Rather \nthan recite a detailed analysis of the record, suffice it to say the preponderance of the evidence \nintroduced at the hearing and contained in the record conclusively reveals the claimant has failed \nand/or refused to prosecute his claim at this time. \n Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the facts, issues, the applicable law, and other \nrelevant matters of record, I hereby make the following: \n \nFINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n \n1. The Commission has jurisdiction of this claim. \n \n2. After having been mailed due and legal notice of both the respondents’ motion and the \nsubject hearing date (both the original date and the rescheduled hearing date), the claimant \nneither inquired concerning or responded to the motion in any way; and he did not appear, \nnor cause anyone to appear on his behalf, at the subject hearing. Therefore, the claimant \nhas waived his right to a hearing on the respondents’ motion to dismiss without prejudice. \n \n3. The claimant has to date failed and/or refused to request a hearing, and he has failed \nand/or refused to take any action(s) to prosecute his claim. \n \n4. Therefore, the respondents’ motion to dismiss without prejudice filed on November 30, \n2022, is GRANTED; and this claim hereby is dismissed without prejudice to its refiling \npursuant to the deadlines prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. Section 11-9-702(a) and (b), and \nCommission Rule 099.13. \n\nLavar Hughes, AWCC No. H003658 \n \n3 \n \n \n This Order shall not be construed to prohibit the claimant, his attorney, any attorney he may \nretain in the future, or anyone acting legally and on his behalf, from refiling the claim if it is \nrefiled within the applicable time periods prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a) and (b). \n The respondents hereby are ordered to pay the court reporter’s invoice within twenty (20) \ndays of their receipt thereof. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n \n____________________________ \n Mike Pickens \n Administrative Law Judge \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nMP/mp","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H003658 LAVAR HUGHES, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT CROUSE LOGGING CO., INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT PRAETORIAN INS. CO./ MIDWESTERN INS. ALLIANCE, LLC, CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE FILED MARCH 8, 2023 Hearing conducted on Wednesda...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:09:17.167Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H003658-2023-03-08","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/HUGHES_LAVAR_H003658_20230308.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}