{"id":"alj-H007009-2025-03-26","awcc_number":"H007009","decision_date":"2025-03-26","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Carl Holden","employer_name":"Bloom Mg’t, Inc","title":"HOLDEN VS. BLOOM MG’T, INC. AWCC# H007009 March 26, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:1","denied:1"],"injury_keywords":["ankle"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/HOLDEN_CARL_H007009_20250326.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"HOLDEN_CARL_H007009_20250326.pdf","text_length":7567,"full_text":"1 \n \nBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H007009 \n \n \nCARL L. HOLDEN,  \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nBLOOM MG’T, INC., \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n \nTRAVELERS CASUALTY INS. CO. OF AMERICA/ \nTRAVELERS CAS. INS. CO. \nCARRIER/TPA                                                                                                    RESPONDENT \n                                                                                                                                     \n \nOPINION FILED MARCH 26, 2025, DENYING THE RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO \nDISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE \n \nHearing conducted on Tuesday,  March  25,  2025, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Little Rock, \nPulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Mr. Carl L. Holden, pro se, of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas, appeared in \nperson at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable Guy Alton Wade, Friday, Eldredge & Clark, \nLittle Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n        A  hearing was  conducted  on Tuesday,  March  25,  2025,  to  determine  whether  this  claim \nshould  be  dismissed  for  lack  of  prosecution  pursuant  to Commission Rule  099.13  (2025 Lexis \nReplacement). \n       The respondents filed a motion to dismiss this claim without prejudice for lack of prosecution \nand failure and/or refusal to comply with discovery via a letter dated January 23, 2025 (MTD), \nwhich  the  Commission  received  and  file-marked  on  January  28,  2025.  The  Commission’s file \ncontained an incorrect address for the claimant, but eventually the Commission provided due and \nlegal notice of both the respondents’ letter MTD as well as timely notice of the subject hearing \n\nCarl L. Holden, AWCC No. H007009 \n2 \n \nwhich is evidenced by, among other things, the fact the claimant appeared in person at the subject \nhearing.  (Commission  Exhibits  1  and  2; Respondents’ Exhibit 1; and Hearing  Transcript).  The \nclaimant testified he never received a copy of the respondents’ discovery requests which it appears \nwere sent to the incorrect address reflected in the Commission’s file, which incorrect address now \nhas been corrected.  \n        The  claimant  testified  he had  sustained  an  injury  to  his  right  ankle  in  October  of  2019  for \nwhich he had undergone four (4) surgeries which resulted in him having plates and screws inserted \nin his right ankle. The respondents accepted this injury as compensable and paid both medical and \nindemnity benefits. The claimant testified he last saw his treating physician sometime in late 2023 \nor early 2024, and last received indemnity benefits sometime in the summer of 2024. He said he \nwas  supposed  to  have  a  follow-up  appointment  with  his  treating  physician,  Dr.  Robert  Martin, \nsometime in 2024, and that Dr. Martin had never released him from his care. (Hearing Transcript).  \n       The claimant further testified that before he had a chance to see Dr. Martin for the follow-up \nvisit  he  had  sustained  another  fall,  which  he  alleged  had  occurred  while  he  was  still  under  Dr. \nMartin’s care, and for which he apparently presented  himself to an emergency  room  (ER)  for \nevaluation. He apparently never saw Dr. Martin for the follow up either before or after this fall.  \nHe said he experienced “pain and popping” after this fall, and he wanted to see a doctor to ensure \nhe had not reinjured his right ankle. He alleged he had asked Travelers to allow him to return to \nsee a doctor for evaluation of his right ankle, but that Travelers told him they would not pay for \nthe  visit. Finally,  the  claimant  testified  he  had  filed  for  and  was  now  drawing  social  security \ndisability  (SSD)  benefits  based  solely  on  his  right  ankle  condition,  and  that  he  had  applied  for \nMedicaid. In summary, the claimant objected to the respondents’ MTD on the grounds he wanted \nto see a doctor for a current evaluation of his right ankle condition at the respondents’ expense, \n\nCarl L. Holden, AWCC No. H007009 \n3 \n \nand  because  he  alleged  he  never  received  the  respondents’  discovery  requests.  (Hearing \nTranscript). \n        The record herein consists of the hearing transcript and any and all exhibits contained therein \nand attached thereto. \nDISCUSSION \n        Consistent with Ark. Code Ann.§ 11-9-702(a)(4) (2024 Lexis Repl.), as well as our court of \nappeals’ ruling in Dillard vs. Benton County Sheriff’s Office, 87 Ark. App. 379, 192 S.W.3d 287 \n(Ark. App. 2004), the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing on the respondents’ motion \nto dismiss. Rather than recite a detailed analysis of the record, suffice it to say the preponderance \nof  the  evidence  introduced  at  the  hearing and  contained  in  the  record conclusively  reveals  the \nclaimant has timely and appropriately objected to the dismissal of his claim at this time. \n        Therefore,  after a thorough  consideration  of  the  facts,  issues,  the applicable  law, the \nrepresentations of the claimant, and other relevant 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 received due and legal notice of the respondents’ letter MTD filed with the \nCommission  on January  28,  2025,  as  well  as  notice  of  the  date,  time,  and  place  of  the \nsubject hearing, the claimant appeared in person at the hearing and objected to the dismissal \nof his claim.  \n \n3. Therefore, the respondents’ letter MTD without prejudice filed January 28, 2025, should \nbe and hereby is respectfully DENIED at this time. \n \n4. The ALJ’s office shall mail the parties the prehearing information documents and start the \nprocess concerning the issue of the claimant’s entitlement, if any, to additional medical \ntreatment, as well as any and all other issues the parties deem ripe for litigation.  \n \n5. The respondents shall propound their discovery requests to the claimant, and the claimant \nand/or his attorney, should he choose to retain one, shall respond to them in the manner \n\nCarl L. Holden, AWCC No. H007009 \n4 \n \nand time period prescribed by law. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this claim \nfor failure to cooperate in the discovery process. \n \n        THE CLAIMANT IS STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO RETAIN THE SERVICES OF \nAN ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT HIM IN THIS MATTER. THE CLAIMANT ALSO IS \nSTRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO CALL THE COMMISSION’S LEGAL ADVISORS’ \nDIVISION  AT  1-800-250-2511  IF  HE  HAS  ANY  QUESTIONS  CONCERNING  HIS \nCLAIM AND/OR THE HEARING PROCESS. \n        If they have not already done so, the respondents hereby are ordered to pay the court reporter’s \ninvoice within twenty (20) days 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 \nMP/mp \n \n \n \n \n\nCarl L. Holden, AWCC No. H007009 \n5","preview":"1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H007009 CARL L. HOLDEN, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT BLOOM MG’T, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT TRAVELERS CASUALTY INS. CO. OF AMERICA/ TRAVELERS CAS. INS. CO. CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MARCH 26, 2025, DENYING THE RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDI...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:43:04.273Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H007009-2025-03-26","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/HOLDEN_CARL_H007009_20250326.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}