{"id":"alj-H103552-2023-11-16","awcc_number":"H103552","decision_date":"2023-11-16","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Woodrow Jackson","employer_name":"Rj Ii, Inc","title":"JACKSON VS. RJ II, INC AWCC# H103552 NOVEMBER 16, 2023","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:6","granted:3"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads//JACKSON_WOODROW_H103552_20231116.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"JACKSON_WOODROW_H103552_20231116.pdf","text_length":2619,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \nCLAIM NO. H103552 \n \nWOODROW JACKSON, JR., EMPLOYEE        CLAIMANT \n \nRJ II, INC. EMPLOYER                    RESPONDENT  \n \nSAGAMORE INS./PROTECTIVE INS., CARRIER/TPA                    RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION FILED 16 NOVEMBER 2023 \n \nHearing  before  Administrative  Law  Judge  JayO.  Howe  in  Little  Rock,  Pulaski \nCounty, Arkansas, on 15 November 2023. \n \nClaimant, Woodrow Jackson, Jr., pro se, did not appear. \n \nMs.  Karen  H.  McKinney,  Attorney-at-Law  for  the  Barber  Law Firm,  appeared  on \nbehalf of the respondents. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n A hearing was held in the above-styled matter on 15 November 2023, in Little Rock, \nArkansas, on the respondents’ Renewed Motion to Dismiss for failure to prosecute pursuant \nto  Arkansas  Code  Annotated §  11-9-702  and/or Rule  099.13  of  the  Arkansas  Workers’ \nCompensation Act.  The claim involves an alleged workplace injury occurring on 20 March \n2021.  The respondents initially moved to dismiss this action for failure to prosecute by way \nof a Motion filed 12 June 2023.  After the claimant requested a hearing on the matter, that \nMotion was held in abeyance, by way of a letter to the parties dated 29 June 2023, pending \nprogress towards a hearing on the matter. \n A prehearing telephone conference was scheduled, but canceled upon a request for the \nsame from the claimant’s counsel, who subsequently moved to withdraw her representation \nby way of a letter to the Clerk of the Commission dated 24 August 2023.  The Full Commission \ngranted  the  withdrawal  as  counsel  in  a  6  September  2023  Order.  Then,  on  11  September \n\nW. JACKSON- H103552 \n2 \n \n2023,  the  respondents  renewed  their  Motion  for  a  Dismissal  Without  Prejudice.    Notice  of \nthat Motion and then for a hearing on the Motion was sent accordingly. \n The claimant did not respond to the respondents’ Motion or the Commission’s letter \nto lodge an objection to the dismissal, and he did not appear before the Commission for the \nscheduled hearing on the respondents’ Motion. \n Based on the record, argument by counsel, and evidence before me, I am compelled to \nfind that the Motion to Dismiss should be granted due to the claimant’s lack of prosecution \nand the matter should be dismissed without prejudice.  \nORDER \n Pursuant to the above, there is no alternative but to find that the Motion to Dismiss \nshould be granted and this matter should be dismissed without prejudice at this time.   \nSO ORDERED. \n \n      ____________________________ \n       JAYO. HOWE \n       ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H103552 WOODROW JACKSON, JR., EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT RJ II, INC. EMPLOYER RESPONDENT SAGAMORE INS./PROTECTIVE INS., CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED 16 NOVEMBER 2023 Hearing before Administrative Law Judge JayO. Howe in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas,...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:00:31.819Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H103552-2023-11-16","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads//JACKSON_WOODROW_H103552_20231116.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}