{"id":"alj-H004697-2025-01-02","awcc_number":"H004697","decision_date":"2025-01-02","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Lawrence George","employer_name":"Windsor Door, LLC","title":"GEORGE VS. WINDSOR DOOR, LLC AWCC# H004697 January 02, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:6","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":["shoulder"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/GEORGE_LAWRENCE_H004697_20250102.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"GEORGE_LAWRENCE_H004697_20250102.pdf","text_length":11151,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO.: H004697 \n \n \nLAWRENCE S. GEORGE, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                                 CLAIMANT \n \nWINDSOR DOOR, LLC,   \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                            RESPONDENT     \n \nSTANDARD FIRE INSURANCE, CO.,/TRAVELERS  \nINDEMNITY COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER/ \nTHIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR (TPA)                                                          RESPONDENT                                                                          \n          \nOPINION FILED JANUARY 2, 2025   \n \nHearing held before Administrative Law Judge Chandra L. Black, Little Rock, Pulaski County, \nArkansas. \n \nThe Claimant, pro se, did not appear at the hearing. \n \nRespondents represented  by the  Honorable Guy  Alton  Wade, Attorney  at  Law,  Little  Rock, \nArkansas. \n \n                                                  STATEMENT OF THE CASE      \n \n A hearing was held on December 19, 2024, in the present case to determine whether this \nArkansas workers’ compensation claim should  be  dismissed  for  failure  to  prosecute  under  the \nprovisions of Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702, and/or Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission \nRule 099.13.  This hearing was held pursuant to the ruling in Dillard v. Benton County Sheriff’s \nOffice, 87 Ark. App. 379, 192 S.W. 3d 287 (2004). \nAppropriate Notice of this hearing was had on all parties to their last known address, in the \nmanner prescribed by law.   \nNo testimony was taken. \nThe  record  consists  of December 19, 2024, hearing transcript and  the  documents held \ntherein.  Commission’s Exhibit consists of two (2) pages, which were provided to the Commission \n\nGEORGE-H004697 \n \n2 \n \nby the  United  States  Postal  Service concerning  delivery  information  for  notices  sent  to  the \nClaimant, and Respondents’ Exhibit 1 consists of nineteen (19) numbered  pages of pleadings, \ncorrespondence, and various other forms related to this claim. \n                                                             Procedural History \n On May 27, 2020, the Claimant’s attorney filed with the Commission a claim for Arkansas \nworkers’ compensation benefits via a Form AR-C.  Per this document, the Claimant alleged that \nhe sustained injuries during the course and in the scope of his employment with the respondent-\nemployer, on May 3, 2022, while working on a machine that pushes metal out.  According to this \ndocument,  the  Claimant  injured  his  right  arm,  right  shoulder  and  other  whole body.  The \nClaimant’s attorney requested both initial and additional benefits.  In fact, his attorney checked off \nall the boxes for every conceivable workers’ compensation benefit under the law. \n  The  respondent-insurance-carrier  filed  a  Form  AR-2 with  the  Commission  on July 20, \n2022.   Per  this  form,  the Respondents accepted  this  claim as  a compensable claim and  began \nmaking payments for workers’ compensation benefits to and on behalf of the Claimant.   \n Subsequently although pleadings were filed and various other discovery was started in this \nmatter, there  was no  bona  request  for  a  hearing  ever  made.  It  appears  that  ultimately,  the \nRespondents paid a 6% impairment rating, and the Claimant returned to work for the Respondents.  \nAs a result, the remaining issue of wage-loss disability was made moot. \n Therefore, the Claimant’s attorney filed a request/motion to withdraw as counsel of record \nfor the Claimant in this claim.  On March 5, 2024, the Full Commission entered an order granting \nthe motion for the Claimant’s attorney to withdraw from representing him in this matter.  \n Since this time, the Claimant has not tried to pursue or otherwise resolve his claim, nor has \nhe made a bona fide request for a hearing since the filing of the Form AR-C.  \n\nGEORGE-H004697 \n \n3 \n \n Therefore, on September 30, 2024, the Respondents filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure \nto Prosecute, with the Commission, along with service of a copy of the motion to the Claimant.  \nHence, the Respondents mailed a copy of said motion to the Claimant via the United States Postal \nService.  \nThe Commission sent a letter to the Claimant on October 15, 2024, informing the Claimant \nof the Respondents’ motion, and a deadline of twenty (20) days, for filing a written response.  Said \nletter was mailed to the Claimant by both first-class and certified mail.  Per information received \nfrom the United States Postal Service, on October 18 this item was delivered to the Claimant’s last \nknown address listed with the Commission.  The signature of the recipient taking delivery of this \nitem is indecipherable.  However, the letter sent via first-class mail has not been returned to the \nCommission.   \n   There was no response whatsoever from the Claimant.   \n Therefore,  pursuant  to a  Hearing  Notice sent  to  the  parties  on November 8,  2024,  the \nCommission notified them that this matter had been set for a hearing on Respondents’ motion to \ndismiss this claim.  Said hearing was scheduled for December 19, 2024, at the Arkansas Workers’ \nCompensation Commission in Little Rock, Arkansas. \nSaid  notice  was  mailed  to  the  Claimant  by  both  first-class  and  certified  mail. Per \ninformation  received  from  the  Postal  Service on  November  23 they  were  unable  to  locate  any \ndelivery information in their records for this item.  However, the letter sent by first-class mail has \nnot been returned to the Commission.  Under these circumstances, I find that the Claimant received \nproper notice of the hearing. \n Still, there was no response from the Claimant.   \n\nGEORGE-H004697 \n \n4 \n \nNevertheless,  the  hearing  was  held  as  scheduled.  The Claimant did  not appear at the \nhearing.  However, the Respondents’ counsel appeared at the hearing and argued that the Claimant \nhas  failed  to  prosecute  his claim for workers’ compensation benefits.  More  specifically, the \nRespondents’ attorney noted that the Claimant has not taken any action to advance his claim since \nthe filing of the Form AR-C, which was done more than six (6) months ago.  He further noted that \nthe Claimant has not taken any affirmative action to resist his claim being dismissed.  Therefore, \nthe Respondents’ attorney moved that this claim be dismissed pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-\n702, and/or Commission Rule 099.13 without prejudice.  \nAdjudication \nThe statutory provisions and Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Rule applicable in the  \nRespondents’ request for dismissal of this claim are outlined below:  \nSpecifically, Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702(a)(4):  \nIf within six (6) months after the filing of a claim for compensation, no bona fide \nrequest for a hearing has been made with respect to the claim, the claim may, upon \nmotion and after hearing, be dismissed without prejudice to the refiling of the claim \nwithin limitation periods specified in subdivisions (a)(1)-(3) of this section. \n \nFurthermore, Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702(d) provides:  \nIf within six (6) months after the filing of a claim for additional compensation, no \nbona fide request for a hearing has been made with respect to the claim, the claim \nmay, upon motion and after hearing, if necessary, be dismissed without prejudice \nto the refiling of the claim within the limitation period specified in subsection (b) \nof this section. \n \n \nCommission Rule 099.13 reads:  \n \nThe Commission may, in its discretion, postpone or recess hearings at the instance \nof either party or on its own motion.  No case set for hearing shall be postponed \nexcept by approval of the Commission or Administrative Law Judge. \n \nIn the event neither party appears at the initial hearing, the case may be dismissed \nby  the  Commission  or  Administrative  Law  Judge,  and  such  dismissal  order  will \n\nGEORGE-H004697 \n \n5 \n \nbecome  final  unless  an  appeal  is  timely  taken  therefrom  or  a  proper  motion  to \nreopen  is  filed  with  the  Commission  within  thirty  (30)  days  from  receipt  of  the \norder. \n \nUpon  meritorious  application  to  the  Commission  from  either  party  in  an  action \npending before the Commission, requesting that the claim be dismissed for want of \nprosecution, the Commission may, upon reasonable notice to all parties, enter an \norder dismissing the claim for want of prosecution.  (Effective March 1, 1982) \n \n            A review of the evidence shows that the Claimant has had ample time to pursue his claim \nfor workers’ compensation benefits, but he has failed to do so.  Specifically, the Claimant has not \nrequested a hearing or otherwise made any effort to prosecute his claim for workers’ compensation \nbenefits since the filing of the Form AR-C, which was done over more than six (6) months ago.  \nMore importantly, nor  has the Claimant resisted  the motion  for dismissal of  his  workers’ \ncompensation claim.   \nHere, the evidence preponderates that the Claimant has failed to prosecute this claim for \nworkers’ compensation benefits.  Under  these  circumstances, I  am  convinced  that  the Claimant \nhas abandoned this claim.  Accordingly, after consideration of the evidence before me, I find that \nthe Respondents’ motion  to dismiss for  a  lack  of  prosecution to  be  well  taken.  I thus find  that \npursuant to the provisions of Ark. Code Ann.§11-9-702, and Commission Rule 099.13, this claim \nfor workers’ compensation benefits is  hereby  respectfully dismissed without prejudice to  the \nrefiling within the limitation period specified under the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Act (the \n“Act”). \n                                  FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \nOn  the  basis  of the  record  as  a  whole,  I  hereby  make  the  following  findings  of  fact  and \nconclusions of law in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-704: \n1. The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of this \nclaim.  \n \n\nGEORGE-H004697 \n \n6 \n \n2. The Respondents filed with the Commission a motion for dismissal of this \nclaim, for which a hearing was held. \n \n3. Appropriate Notice of the dismissal hearing was had on all parties to their \nlast known address, in the manner prescribed by law.    \n \n            4. The Respondents’ motion to dismiss this claim for a lack of prosecution is \nhereby  granted, without  prejudice,  per  Ark.  Code  Ann. §11-9-702,  and \nCommission Rule 099.13, to the refiling of it within the limitation period \nspecified by law.  \n \n                                                           ORDER \n \nBased  upon  the  foregoing findings, I  have  no  alternative  but  to  dismiss  this  claim  for \nArkansas workers’ compensation benefits. This dismissal is per Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702, and \nCommission  Rule  099.13, without  prejudice to  the  refiling  of  this claim  within the limitation \nperiod specified under the Act. \n           IT IS SO ORDERED. \n \n \n                              _______________________________ \n               Chandra L. Black \n               Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO.: H004697 LAWRENCE S. GEORGE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT WINDSOR DOOR, LLC, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT STANDARD FIRE INSURANCE, CO.,/TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER/ THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR (TPA) RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JANUARY 2, 2025 Hearing held before ...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:44:03.048Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H004697-2025-01-02","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/GEORGE_LAWRENCE_H004697_20250102.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}