{"id":"alj-H204976-2023-04-19","awcc_number":"H204976","decision_date":"2023-04-19","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Lyna Beals","employer_name":"Milligan Racing (allen Milligan)","title":"BEALS VS. MILLIGAN RACING (ALLEN MILLIGAN) AWCC# H204976 APRIL 19, 2023","outcome":"denied","outcome_keywords":["granted:1","denied:3"],"injury_keywords":["neck","shoulder","knee","wrist","back","cervical","concussion","rotator cuff"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads//BEALS_LYNA_H204976_20230419.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"BEALS_LYNA_H204976_20230419.pdf","text_length":55295,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \n                                                         CLAIM NO.: H204976 \nLYNA M. BEALS,  \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                             CLAIMANT \n \nMILLIGAN RACING (ALLEN MILLIGAN),  \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT \n \nLIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, \nINSURANCE CARRIER                                                                                    RESPONDENT \n \nLIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP,  \nTHIRD PARTY ADMINSTRATOR (TPA)                                                     RESPONDENT \n \n \n         OPINION FILED APRIL 19, 2023        \n        \nHearing held before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE CHANDRA L. BLACK in Hot Springs, \nGarland County, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant represented by Ms. Evelyn E. Brooks, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas. \n \nRespondents represented by Mr. Michael E. Ryburn, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n \nStatement of the Case \nOn  January  20,  2023,  the  above-captioned  claim  came  on  for  a  hearing in  Hot  Springs, \nArkansas.    A  pre-hearing  telephone  conference  was  conducted  in  the  above-styled  claim  on \nSeptember 27, 2022, from which a Pre-hearing Order was filed on that same day.  A copy of said \norder and the parties’ responsive filings have been marked as Commission’s Exhibit 1 and made a \npart of the record without objection.   \nStipulations \nDuring  the  pre-hearing  telephone  conference,  and/or  hearing  the  parties  agreed  to  the \nfollowing stipulations: \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n2 \n \n1. The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of the within \nclaim. \n2. That  the  employee-employer-carrier  relationship  existed  at  all  relevant  times \nincluding on or about April 16, 2022, when the Claimant alleges to have sustained \na compensable injury to her neck. \n3. The Claimant’s average weekly wage on April 16, 2022, was $600.00.\n1\n  \n4. The Respondents have controverted this claim in its entirety.  \n5. All   issues   not   litigated   herein   are reserved  under  the  Arkansas  Workers’ \nCompensation Act, including but not limited to the Claimant’s alleged injuries to \nher shoulder, right elbow, and right knee. \nIssues \nBy agreement of the parties, the issues to be litigated at the hearing included the following: \n1. Whether  the  Claimant  sustained  a  compensable  injury  to  her  neck  on  April  16, \n2022.  \n2. Whether the Claimant’s average weekly wage on April 16, 2022, was $600.00, or \nwas she a seasonal worker.  (This issue has been rendered moot and not addressed \nin  this  Opinion  because  following  the  hearing,  the  parties  stipulated  that  the \nClaimant’s average weekly wage was $600.00).      \n3. Whether the Claimant is entitled to temporary total disability compensation from \nMay 13, 2022, through January 12, 2023. \n4. Whether the Claimant is entitled to the medical  benefits of record relating to her \n \n1\nAfter the hearing, the parties agreed to stipulate to an average weekly wage of $600.00.  \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n3 \n \nneck  condition;  and  future  medical  treatment  as  recommended  by  her  treating \nphysician, Dr. John Pace.    \n5. Whether the Claimant’s attorney is entitled to a controverted attorney’s fee. \nContentions \n The respective contentions of the parties are as follows: \nClaimant:  \nAt the beginning of the hearing, the Claimant’s attorney modified her contentions to state, \nin relevant part: That the Claimant had a compensable injury to various body parts but specifically \ntoday only her alleged neck condition and associate benefits of temporary total disability benefits \nand medical treatment for that condition will be litigated at this time.  \nRespondents: \n At the beginning of the hearing, the Respondents’ attorney modified their contentions to \ncontend in relevant that the Claimant did not injure her neck on April 16, 2022, and that she has \nnot been temporarily disabled for any period of time.   \n                    FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \nBased on my review of the record as a whole, to include the aforementioned documentary \nevidence, other matters properly before the Commission, and after having had an opportunity to \nhear  the  testimony  of  the  witnesses  and  observe  their  demeanor,  I  hereby  make  the  following \nfindings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of  law  in  accordance  with  Ark.  Code  Ann.  §11-9-704  (Repl. \n2012): \n1.      The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction over this     \n          \nclaim. \n \n2.       I hereby accept the above-mentioned proposed stipulations as fact. \n \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n4 \n \n3.     The Claimant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained a    \n \n                      compensable injury to her neck on April 16, 2022, which resolved no later than  \n         \n          April 21, 2022.         \n           \n          4.         The Claimant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence her entitlement to \n    \n          any temporary total disability compensation. \n \n          5.        The Claimant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the medical treatment   \n                     she received on April 18 and 21, 2022 was reasonable and necessary treatment for          \n                     her compensable neck injury.  However, the Claimant failed to prove her need for \n                     any future medical treatment for her neck injury.    \n    6.        The issue pertaining to a controverted attorney’s fee has now been rendered moot   \n \n         because no indemnity benefits have been awarded on this claim.  \n \n          7.        All issues not litigated herein are reserved under the Arkansas Workers’  \n \n  Compensation Act.      \n \nSummary of Evidence \nMrs. Lyna M. Beals (referred to herein as the “Claimant”), and her husband, Mr. Thomas \nJames Beals, testified during the hearing.  \n            The record consists of the January 20, 2023 hearing transcript and the following exhibits: \nSpecifically,  Commission’s  Exhibit  1 includes  the  Commission’s  Prehearing  Order filed  on \nSeptember 27, 2022 and the parties’ responsive filings; Claimant’s Medical Exhibit consisting of \nforty-five   numbered   pages was  marked  Claimant’s  Exhibit  1;  Claimant’s   Exhibit   No.   2 \nencompasses a Non-Medical Exhibit and is made up of nine numbered pages; Claimant’s Exhibit \n3 is a  Video of the  Incident on April 16, 2022, which is retained in the Commission’s file; and \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n5 \n \nRespondents’ Non-Medical Documentary Exhibit includes four pages and it has been marked as \nRespondents’ Exhibit 1. \n Although  there  was  some  discussion  of  the  possibility  of  the  Respondents  taking  the \ndepositions of two potential witnesses,  namely, Allen Milligan, and his wife, Jeanette Milligan; \nhowever,  counsel  for  the  Respondents  has  decided  not  to  take  these  depositions.    Also,  the \nClaimant was given additional time to submit her tax records, but the necessity for the submission \nof  these  records  was  rendered  moot  because  the  parties  have  now  agreed  to  an  average  weekly \nwage for the Claimant.           \n                                                 Testimony \n  \nThe Claimant/Lyna M. Beals   \n The Claimant was forty-nine years old at the time of the hearing.  She confirmed that  in \nJuly 2021, she was hired to work for Mr. Allen Milligan, the owner of Milligan Racing, a horse \nracing company.  She testified that Mr. Milligan is a horse trainer.  According to the Claimant, at \nthe time of hire, her job title was groom.  She explained that she had previously worked for both \nMr. Milligan and his wife approximately five years ago.  The Claimant essentially testified that \nshe worked as a full-time employee of Mr. Milligan during the horse racing season at Oaklawn \nPark, in Hot Springs.  According to the Claimant, once the season ended, she continued working \nfor Mr. Milligan at  his farm in Royal,  Arkansas.  She  further testified that  Mr. Milligan rents a \nfarm after the season ends, because it is hard to find a facility in the surrounding area of Oaklawn \nPark.  According to the Claimant, Mr. Milligan has rented the farm for the past two years.  She \nconfirmed that she continued to work for Mr. Milligan until May 12, 2022.  Per the Claimant, she \nhad no prior plans to end her employment with Mr. Milligan.  \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n6 \n \n According  to  the  Claimant,  she  also  worked  for  Mr.  Milligan’s  wife,  Mrs.  Jeanette \nMilligan,  cleaning  her  office  every  other  week.    The  Claimant  testified  that  his  wife  runs  the \nHPBA, which is the medical center at Oaklawn.  \n The Claimant’s attorney asked her to explain her employment duties with Milligan Racing \nthat  she  had  over  a  period  of  time  before  April  16,  2022.    Specifically,  the  Claimant  basically \ntestified  that  she  was  promoted  to  the  position  of  assistant  horse  trainer,  but  she  did  not  have a \nlicense.    According  to  the  Claimant,  she  ran  the  entire “barn”  and  farm  for  Mr.  Milligan.    The \nClaimant testified that they called it a “barn,” but it is an out stable there at Oaklawn.  According \nto the Claimant, her employment duties for Mr. Milligan included managing the other employees, \npayroll  functions,  the  hiring  and  firing  of  employees,  and  various  other  responsibilities.    The \nClaimant testified that they had hot walkers, and these workers were seasonal employees.  Per the \nClaimant, the seasonal people worked during the horse racing season at Oaklawn, which was from \nDecember  until  May.    However,  the  Claimant  was  a  full-time  employee  of  Mr.  Milligan  and \nworked year-round for him.  According to the Claimant, Mr. Milligan paid her in cash.     \n The Claimant testified that her husband also worked for Mr. Milligan. She testified that she \nnever traveled out of state, but she did go to Lone Star Park last year.  Per the Claimant, she won \na race for Mr. Milligan.  She testified that at Lone Star, she worked as a groom and went there for \ntwo weeks to help  Mr.  Milligan  get set up.  The Claimant stated that she and her husband  both \nhauled horses for Mr. Milligan to Louisiana.  She essentially stated that they did a lot more work \nthan  just  work  during  the “live  meet”  at  Oaklawn.    According  to  the  Claimant,  they  performed \nseveral tasks for Mr. Milligan outside of that time frame.  \n Next,  the Claimant was shown a copy of Claimant’s Non-Medical  Exhibit  on  page  1, \nwhich is a payroll sheet of some her earnings from December 3, 2021, through May 13, 2022.  She \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n7 \n \nconfirmed  having  previously  seen  this  payroll  record.    However,  the  Claimant  explained  this \ndocument  does  not  show  all  her  earnings.    Even  though  the  Claimant  gave  extensive  testimony \nregarding her pay arrangement with Mr. Milligan, the majority of this testimony has been omitted \nsince the parties have now agreed that the Claimant’s average weekly wage on the day of her injury \nwas $600.00.  \n Regarding the Claimant’s April 16, 2022, work-related injury, she essentially testified that \nwhile in stall eight, she was struck by a horse during a paddock event.  According to the Claimant, \nshe and Mr. Milligan had the horses in a huge area so they could circle around.  During this event, \nbystanders are given the opportunity to view the horses and check them out before placing their \nbets.  Specifically,  the  Claimant  testified  that  this  particular  horse  had  never  been  in  a  paddock \nbefore participating in a live race.  She essentially stated that the horse was what they call a “first-\ntime  starter;”  and  as  a  result  the  horse  was  very  nervous  and  making  various  movements.  \nTherefore, Mr. Milligan told the groom to take the horse and walk her a few laps.   \nSpecifically, the Claimant testified regarding her accidental injury of April 16, 2022: \n...I was at her right front leg area and the horse just reared up, lunged forward, \nand I was right in her line of fire on the front right of her arm. And all I know is I went \nflying past the nine hole all the way to the - - almost to the wall where the people were, \nand when I landed, I landed on my right shoulder and I hit my right side of my head \non the cement, and I landed on my right knee, as well.  That was the last part  -  -- the \nbody part that fell.  But when I came to, I sat up and I could not get up.  Allen Milligan \nhad to walk over, because I was just in a daze, and he had to help me up because I just \n-- I didn’t -- I was, you know, I was just confused at what was going on.  It happened \nso fast...      \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n8 \n \nThe Claimant testified that she was in shock because she had never been hit that hard before \nby a horse during her ten years of working with them.  According to the Claimant, immediately \nafter the incident, her left side and wrist were hurting.  She also was sore, and her right collarbone \narea hurt the most.  They gave the Claimant ice packs and she was told by her boss, Mr. Milligan, \nto take it easy.   \nShe admitted that she has watched the video offered into evidence, which shows the April \n16, 2022, incident of her being struck by the horse.  Per the Claimant, the angle of the video is not \nvery good.  My review of the surveillance video confirms the same.      \nThe Claimant agreed that there are also some photographs admitted into evidence as part \nof Claimant’s non-medical exhibit on pages 9, 12, and 13.  She was allowed to peruse the pictures.  \nThe  Claimant  stated  that  the  picture  on  page  9  depicts  her  back,  the  left  of  her  lower  back.  \nHowever, the Claimant’s attorney requested that the photo of the Claimant’s back be removed \nsince it does not relate to the current.  She confirmed that the photograph on page 12 depicts the \nright side of her neck.  Per the Claimant, her neck was inflamed  and the EMT looked at it and felt \nthe swelling.  The Claimant agreed that the picture shows what her neck looked like on the night \nof April 16, 2022.  She confirmed that her husband took the pictures.  On the next page at 13, the \nClaimant testified that this picture shows the right side of her neck.  The Claimant testified that \nwhen she got home on the night of the accident, her neck was “really stiff.”   \nIn response to being asked if she ever had problems with her neck prior to this accident, \nthe Claimant replied, “No, never. Never.” The Claimant confirmed that she returned to work the \nnext  day.    However,  the  Claimant  maintained  that  she  was “really  useless”  because  she  was \nhobbling  around  and  felt  like  she  had  aged  twenty  years.   She  admitted  that  on  the  day  of  the \nincident, she did not ask to go to a doctor at that point.  The Claimant confirmed that she worked \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n9 \n \nwith Mr. Milligan upon her return to work the following day, but she did not ask him if she could \nsee a doctor at that point.  However, according to the Claimant, Mr. Milligan told her to contact \nJeannette Milligan (his wife) and talk with her about the claim because he was party to this claim.   \nThe Claimant testified that she sent Jeanette a text because she was several buildings away \nfrom her.  In this text message, the Claimant testified that she asked Jeanette Milligan for medical \ntreatment. She further testified that Mrs. Milligan gave her the contact information for her to go to \nSherwood Urgent Care, in Hot Springs.  According to the Claimant, she needed a claim number in \norder for her to be seen at the clinic.  However, the Claimant testified that Ms. Milligan did not \nprovide  her  with  the  claim  information  until  April  18.    As  a  result,  that  was  the  first  day  the \nClaimant received medical treatment.  The Claimant testified that the medical staff at Sherwood \nUrgent Clinic took X-rays and prescribed her some muscle relaxers.  She denied that they ordered \nphysical therapy for her at that time. \nUltimately,  the  Claimant  did  undergo  some  physical  therapy  treatment.  However,  she \ndenied  that  the  physical  therapy  was  very  helpful  in  relieving  her  symptoms.    According  to  the \nClaimant,  she  was  given some “dry needle shots.”  However, the Claimant maintained that  the \nmedical  staff  person  did  not  note  this  treatment  in  her  medical  records.    Per  the  Claimant,  they \nonly notated when she was late for her appointments.  She testified that she was late because she \nwas in a lot of pain and had difficulty getting to sleep.  \nSpecifically, the Claimant explained how her physical therapy came to an end: \nA: I  called one day  and said I was running late, and I say, “I’m five (5) \nminutes away,” and she “Oh, don’t bother.”  So, Sonya [phonetic], the receptionist, \nyou know, we had a good rapport every time we’d come in, but she just seemed really \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n10 \n \nrude  on  the  phone, and she said, ‘We’ll get a medical staff to call you back. Don’t \ncome in until we call you.”  \nThe Claimant confirmed that she had problems attending her physical therapy sessions at \ntimes.  She attributed her failure to attend these appointments to the increased pain she experienced \nbecause of the physical therapy exercises that she could not complete the way they wanted her to, \nsuch  as  with  the  arm  machine.  According  to  the  Claimant,  she  would  compensate  her  left  arm \nbecause her left arm was stronger than her right arm.  After they ended her physical therapy, the \nClaimant sought treatment on her own.  According to the Claimant, she obtained an MRI for her \nneck because she believed something was severely wrong with it.  She admitted that there is a gap \nin her treatment, from the time of her physical therapy treatment and the MRI being performed.   \nWhile treating at Sherwood Urgent Care, the Claimant was restricted to light duty, which \nincluded no pushing, pulling, bending, or squatting.  Per the Claimant’s testimony, she was unable \nto perform her regular job as a groom, and nor was she able to perform employment duties as an \nassistant trainer for that matter.  She testified that Jeanette and Allen Milligan told her to “just take \nit easy.”  The Claimant confirmed that she continued to work for them during the time she was \ngetting treatment at the urgent care clinic.  In fact, she testified her workload increased.  \nAccording to the Claimant, once the meet ended, the horses were moved to other tracks.  \nIn this case, they were moved to Louisiana.  Per the Claimant, since she lived there and was the \nassistant trainer, she had to cover everything when it came to cleaning out and gutting the stalls.  \nThe Claimant testified that she had to use wheelbarrows to clean twenty-five stalls.  If they failed \nto do the cleaning, there was a deposit that her employer would lose.  The Claimant further testified \nthat everything had to be removed and taken to the farm.  This clean-up included the removal of \nhorse tack such as the saddles, bins, and the washing machine.  According to  the Claimant, she \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n11 \n \nused her husband’s truck to move the equipment.  She testified that she had six truckloads of heavy \nitems that she was not supposed to be moving.  The Claimant testified that she was doing this work \naround the time period of around May 11.  She stated that the horses had been shipped and they \nhad a week to be completely cleared out of Oaklawn Park.   \nAs  of  the  date  of  the  hearing,  the  Claimant  no  longer  worked  for  Mr.  Milligan.      The \nClaimant explained that on May 14, she was at the farm in Royal and her back was out due to all \nof the lifting (including the washing machine) and gutting of the stalls.  According to the Claimant, \nthese activities tore her back up to where it was completely out, along with   her shoulder and neck.  \nThe Claimant testified that Mr. Milligan told Myrtle (a coworker)  to have her jog one of the horses.  \nHowever, the Claimant testified that once Myrtle saw her condition, she took the horse from her \nand jogged it. \nThe Claimant testified that she ended up hiring a guy by the name of Noah to work for her.  \nShe stated that she paid him $200.00 out of her pay for him to cover for her a few days until she \ncould  recuperate.  However,  the  Claimant  essentially  testified  that  Mr.  Milligan  became  upset \nbecause this guy had been working for her and handling his horses.  At that point, Mr. Milligan \ncalled the Claimant when she was at the farm and told her, he did not want the guy there and for \nher not to come back to work until she was 100% better.  The Claimant testified that she gathered \nher tack and everything that she had and left the farm. Her testimony indicates that this was the \nlast time she worked for Mr. Milligan.   \nShe  confirmed  that  she  has  worked  elsewhere  since  her  employment  with  Mr.  Milligan \nended.  However, the Claimant explained that she is unable to do what she set out to do, which \nwas be a groom.  According to the Claimant, she has been downgraded to what they call a “hot \nwalker” because she has numbness of the fingers on both hands and sharp pains.  \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n12 \n \nThe Claimant confirmed that as of the date of the hearing, she works for another employer.  \nSpecifically,  the  Claimant  testified  that  her  friend  told  her  about  a  job  as  a  hot  walker  and  she \nstarted that position last Friday.  Per the Claimant, her current job is a part-time position, and she \nworks with “mild horses.”  Her current pay is $250.00 a week in cash.  She works four hours a \nday,  seven  days  a  week.    According  to  the  Claimant,  this  is  her  first  job  since  leaving  her \nemployment with Mr. Milligan.    \nRegarding  the  numbness  in  the  hands,  which  she  previously  mentioned,  the  Claimant \ntestified that these symptoms have progressed over the months.  According to the Claimant, while \nundergoing physical therapy, she had upper body collarbone area issues.  The Claimant testified \nthat two months after she stopped the physical therapy, she began having sharp pains, which started \nin her thumb and index finger on both hands.  As a result, the Claimant went to urgent care. The \nClaimant sought treatment from FirstCare Walk-in Clinic, in Hot Springs.  However, according to \nthe Claimant, they wanted a referral from Sherwood Urgent Care, so she had to go back there for \na  referral  to  do  an  MRI.    The  Claimant  testified  that  the  nurse  at  the  Sherwood  clinic  called \nJeannette Milligan, and she told the nurse that the Claimant no longer worked for them, and she \nwas unsure if her treatment would be covered.  The Claimant agreed that she did not seek medical \ntreatment or the MRI at that time because Liberty Mutual would not cover it.  Her MRI was  not \nperformed until November 2022 although in June 2022 Sherwood Urgent Care recommended that \nshe have an MRI.  The Claimant agreed that she was not able to see a doctor before she went to \nthe urgent care  referred her for the MRI.   The Claimant testified that she did not see any other \ndoctor except for Dr. Pace, after the MRI results.    \nShe  testified  that  the  symptoms  in  her  neck  have  worsened  since  the  accident  occurred.  \nAccording  to  the  Claimant,  Dr.  Pace  has  performed  two  injections  on  her  neck.    However,  the \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n13 \n \nClaimant testified that her neck is stiff all the time.  She stated that she does not have full mobility \nand is not the same.   According to the Claimant, she never had any problems, or numbness in her \nhands and arms, but now she constantly has tingling.  The Claimant testified that although the pain \nis still there, the injections helped with the numbness in her hands because they were completely \nnumb prior to the injections.   \nOn cross-examination, the Claimant denied that she hired for the job with Mr. Milligan just \nfor the Oaklawn meet.  However, the Claimant testified that other workers were hired solely for \nthis purpose.  She confirmed that Janette Milligan paid her $75.00 for the two offices she cleaned \nfor her at HPBA.  The Claimant testified that Jeanette Milligan paid her $150.00 every two weeks, \nwith a company  check.   The Claimant admitted that she did not bring those deposit slips to  the \nhearing.  She explained that HPBA is the Horsemen’s Association.   The  Claimant  testified  that \nHPBA is Janette Milligan’s employer.  She denied that HPBA is part of Milligan Racing.   \n Subsequently, the Claimant testified regarding her alleged injuries, in particular her neck \ncondition: \n Q: Okay.  Now when this claim first came up, we filed our various filings and   \n            you initially said you hurt your shoulder, your right elbow, and your right knee. \n A: Yes, sir. \n Q: Why didn’t you say neck?  \n A: My collarbone is my neck, sir. \n Q; You’re saying it’s your collarbone? \n A: I hurt everything on my right side. \nCounsel  for  the  Respondents  asked  the  Claimant  about  the  MRI  which  shows “a  small \nbulging disc” of her cervical spine.  She maintained that her collarbone was hurt the day of the \nincident. The Claimant was asked about objective medical findings demonstrating something was \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n14 \n \nwrong with her collarbone and she stated that the EMT saw her collarbone.   She admitted that she \ncontinued to work after her accident, but denied she was at 100%.  The Claimant confirmed she \nwas injured on May 11 as shown in an entry on page 14 of her medical exhibit, which indicates \nshe reinjured her right shoulder and neck.  However, the Claimant next maintained that the wording \nis incorrect when they say “reinjuring.”  The Claimant testified that it is the same initial injury \nfrom the accident she sustained on April 16, 2022. \nThe Claimant admitted that she was released to go back to work.  She confirmed that she \nsent a text to her employer on April 18 stating that she went to the clinic yesterday to get released \nand they said she needed a CAT scan first.  The Claimant confirmed that she underwent the CAT \nscan.  She admitted to further writing in the text message, “CT scan  results are good, just got the \nresults.”  The Claimant also admitted to writing in that same text message exchange that they could \nsee her tomorrow anytime at Sherwood Urgent Care to get her released for work.   \n Specifically, the Claimant explained: \nQ: So, at  that  point  and  time  you’re  fine,  and  your  CAT  scan  didn’t  show \nanything; is that right? \nA; No.  the CAT scan, I guess, did not show my C5 and 6.  I’m not a doctor but \n... \nNext,  the  Claimant  was  asked  if  following  this  April  16,  2022,  incident,  she  had  a  test \nshowing something wrong with her neck, and she replied: “There’s everything wrong with my \nneck.”  Although it was not until after May 11, when the Claimant had the second incident, there \nis  an  MRI  showing  the  bulging  disc,  the  Claimant  continued  to  maintain  it  is  the  same  injury.  \nHowever, the Claimant was unable to explain why the doctor said she was “reinjured,” but stated \nthis was not correct.      \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n15 \n \nEven though the Claimant continued working at the farm after May 11, she testified she \nwas in “really poor shape” because of the six truckloads of things she had moved for Mr. Milligan.  \nAccording to the Claimant, there is  a lot involved in clearing out Oaklawn once the meet ends.  \nShe stated that she had to do the cleanup to move to the farm and resume working the very next \nday.  The Claimant testified that she had to clear everything  out of Oaklawn and put it all in Mr. \nMilligan’s facility at the farm in Royal that he had been renting for over two years.   \nShe confirmed that Mr. Milligan telephoned her on May 14, and told her not to come back \nunless she was 100%.  However, the Claimant testified she never got the release to return to work.  \nAccording  to  the  Claimant,  between  May  and  January  she  was  recuperating  because  she  was \nunable to do anything.  She testified she had to go to a lower paying job, which is very minimal \nwork compared to a grooming position.  The Claimant confirmed that she told her current employer \nabout her condition.  Per the Claimant, she currently works as a hot walker, which entails walking \na horse in circles.  She testified that there is no extra work or lifting a horse’s leg like she used to \ndo.  The Claimant denied that the horses she works with tend to jerk and rear up.  She testified that \nthe horses at this barn are “really tamed horses,” in comparison to those at other barns. \nPrior  to  horse  racing  type  work,  the  Claimant  testified  that  she  could  type  seventy-five \nwords a minute and once worked at a Revenue Office.  However, she testified that she is unable \nto  type  due  to  the  neuropathy  in  her  hands.    The  Claimant  has  a  GED.   She  confirmed  that  she \npreviously worked at the Department of Motor Vehicles in Norfolk, Virginia.                                            \nOn redirect-examination, the Claimant testified that she complained of neck pain right after \nthe accident when she went in to see the doctor.  She confirmed that she continued to complain of \nneck pain during the entire time she was being treated at Sherwood Urgent Care.  The Claimant \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n16 \n \nadmitted that the epidural steroid injections done by Dr. Pace helped with the numbness and the \npain, but she denied that she is 100%.  She has not been released to return to work.   \nThomas James Beals \n The Claimant’s husband, Mr. Thomas Beals, was called as a witness to testify on behalf of \nhis wife.  Mr. Beals confirmed that he is associated with the Claimant by marriage.  The couple \nhas been married for three years.  Mr. Beals confirmed that he has knowledge of where his wife \nwas  working  from  2021  and  the  beginning  part  of    2022.    He  confirmed  that  they  both  were \nworking for Allen Milligan at that time.  Mr. Beals testified that he worked as an assistant trainer.  \nAccording to Mr. Beals, the Claimant had worked for Mr. Milligan off and on for years and years.  \nMr. Beals explained that in 2022 the Claimant worked full time for Mr. Milligan except for the \ntwo months that they took off.  The couple went to Texas with Mr. Milligan for two weeks to help \nthem get set-up there.  According to Mr. Beals, Mr. Milligan told them not to get a job because he \nwas coming back to Hot Springs, which he did do in July.  Mr. Beals testified that they went back \nto work for Mr. Milligan out at the farm on Sunshine.  However, not long after that Mr. Beals went \nto work for another barn.  He testified that the Claimant stayed and worked full time and worked \nall the way through the meet until she got hurt in May.  \n He testified that the Claimant stayed working full-time with Allen (Milligan) all the way \nthrough the season and until when she got hurt, which was in May (2022).  According to Mr. Beals, \nthe Claimant worked for Mr. Milligan for ten months when they returned to Hot Springs in July, \nwhich was during season 2021.  Mr. Beals testified that the Claimant made $600.00 a week while \nworking for Mr. Milligan.  \n On cross-examination, Mr. Beals confirmed that he testified that the Claimant worked until \nshe got hurt in May.  In relevant part, Mr. Beals clarified: \n Q: And in May was when she was unloading the truck? \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n17 \n \nA: Well, when she got hurt at the races, I guess that was in April, and then, you know, \nshe was on light-duty.  And when they shipped out, they left her to just load everything up \nand take it to the farm, and that was at the end of May.  She borrowed my truck, and she \nmade  a  couple  of  loads  before  I  got  free  and  once  I  got  over  there --  because  I  had  her \nDurango, and once I got there, I helped her with several loads after, you know, I got back \nand  started  helping  her.    But  it  was  everything  from  gates,  to  rakes,  to  pitchforks, \nwheelbarrows, refrigerators, washer, dryer.  There was – I mean, they just took what was \nneeded  for  the  horses  they  left  with,  and  they  jetted  out  of  town.    And  she  had  hired  a \ncouple of other people to help her load up and everything, which was out of our pocket, \nand then they left when I got there and me and her finished the rest of the loads.                     \n Mr. Beals confirmed that the Claimant “reinjured” herself as the medical report states. Per \nthis report, on May 11, 2022, the Claimant reinjured her right shoulder and neck loading a truck.  \nHe testified that she reinjured her right shoulder and neck while loading a truck.   \nMoreover,  Mr.  Beals  specifically  testified, in  relevant  part  regarding  the  Claimant’s \ncondition after the May 11 incident, “...She  was  in  pain  immensely.    Honestly,  you  know, \npersonally I don’t think she should been doin’ all that but, I mean, yes, she did hurt herself again...”   \nUnder further questioning, Mr. Beals confirmed that after the Claimant injured herself for \nthe second time in May, she stopped working for Mr. Milligan.  He testified that the Claimant was \nin tears and a lot of pain.  According to Mr. Beals, the Claimant told Mr. Milligan about what had \nhappened, and she let him know that she was hurting worse.  Mr. Beals testified that the Claimant \nwas supposed to go directly out to the training center to work, but she could not do that and could \nhardly walk.    \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n18 \n \nHowever,  Mr.  Beals  testified  that  Mr.  Milligan  told  the  Claimant  to  handle  everything. \nSince she was unable to work, she got a man to come to work for her until she could feel better.  \nMr.  Beals  essentially  testified  that  Mr.  Milligan  became  furious  and  was  ranting  and  raving \nbecause the Claimant had someone he did not know in the shed row.  He testified that Mr. Milligan \ntold the Claimant she could not come back to work until she was 100%.  According to Mr. Beals, \nhe was with the Claimant when she got the phone call from Mr. Milligan.   \n Mr. Beals testified that the Oaklawn horse racing season runs from December 9  until May \n15.   He confirmed that the Claimant worked at Oaklawn during the 2021 season.  Mr. Beals further \ntestified that the Claimant was there from 2021 until 2022, which cuts into the next year.  \n On redirect examination, Mr. Beals confirmed the Claimant was on light duty, at the point \nwhen she was cleaning out the stalls.  He confirmed that when the Claimant got hurt in the paddock \nduring the incident with the horse, she had problems with her neck and shoulder.  Mr. Beals stated \nthat he took all kinds of pictures of the Claimant’s  knee and elbows that night.  He agreed that the \nClaimant’s neck and shoulder continued to bother her while she was working on light duty.  Mr. \nBeals testified that for the first couple of days, the Claimant was stiff and could hardly move.  He \ndenied that the Claimant ever got completely better while working on light duty. According to Mr. \nBeals, the Claimant worked as a groom and assistant trainer for Mr. Milligan.         \n            I  specifically  questioned  Mr.  Beals  concerning  this  May  11  incident.  Mr.  Beals  testified \nthat the incident occurred when the two of them were loading the truck.  According to Mr. Beals,  \nthey were picking up a washer or dryer, and when they picked it up, “she just gave out.”  Mr. Beals \ntestified that he asked the Claimant “What’s wrong?”  And the Claimant replied, “I hurt myself \nagain.”  He  finished  loading  the  truck  and  when  Mr.  Beals  got  in  the  truck,  the  Claimant  was \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n19 \n \nholding her neck and shoulder.  Mr. Beals essentially testified that he could tell the Claimant was \nin pain, so he did not ask her any questions.  \n On further recross-examination, Mr. Beals maintained that the Claimant got hurt in April \nand  then  in  May,  she  hurt  herself  even  more.  However,  he  essentially  confirmed  that  after  the \nMay 11 incident, the Claimant stopped working.   \n Mr.  Beals  admitted  on  further  redirect  examination  that  the  Claimant  had  not  been \ncomplying  with  her  light  duty  restrictions  before  the  May  11  incident.  He  testified  that  Mr. \nMilligan still had the Claimant grooming and she had been walking around stiff and in tears before \nMay.  Mr. Beals testified that other grooms were taking horses from the Claimant because she was \nunable to do the work.  However, Mr. Beals admitted that this occurred before the Claimant’s job \nended in May.                  \nMedical Evidence \n On April 18, 2022, the Claimant sought treatment for pain from the Sherwood Urgent Care \nClinic,  in  Hot  Springs.    There,  the  Claimant  came  under    the  care  of  Pamela  Speed, NP  (nurse \npractitioner).    At  that  time,  the  Claimant  complained  of  shoulder  and  neck  pain.    The  Claimant \nreported  a  history  of  having  been  injured  on  the  Saturday  while  working  with  horses  at  the \nracetrack. Specifically, the Claimant  stated that she was pushed over striking her right shoulder \nand her neck was hurting.   The Claimant reported that most of her symptoms were on the right \ncervical  side.    Additionally,    the  Claimant  stated  that  she  had  muscle  aches,  muscle  pain,  and \nmuscle  spasms.   On  physical  examination,  Nurse  Speed  noted  that  the  Claimant  had  mild  neck \nspasm, along with anterior neck bilateral pain.  Nurse Speed diagnosed the Claimant with among \nother things, “Cervicalgia, Illness, Acute,” for which she prescribed a medication regime which \nincluded a Medrol Pak 4mg in a dose pack, and Robaxin.  Speed authored an Excuse for Work on \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n20 \n \nthat  same  day.    She  released  the  Claimant  to  restricted/accommodated  duty.    Her  restrictions \nincluded  limited  standing,  sitting,  and  walking  along  with  a  ten-pound  lifting  restriction  to  her \nright hand.      \n The Claimant sought follow-up care from Sherwood Urgent Care on April 21, 2022, due \nto pain in her neck, among other bodily parts.  She stated that she was kicked by a horse on the left \nside, but this caused her to fall, and she landed on her right side, striking her head on the ground.  \nThe Claimant reported she “hit her head on a concrete floor” when she fell.  She reported that she \nstarted  having  dizziness,  headache,  and  nausea  after  leaving  the  clinic.    However,  the  Claimant \nspecifically reported that her symptoms were now better.  H er shoulder pain, and right back pain \nwere now resolved, and her ROM in her neck was normal.  Although the Claimant reported her \nsymptoms had resolved, a CT of the head was ordered due to a diagnosis of concussion without \nloss of consciousness.  Medical staff instructed the Claimant to return to the clinic for follow-up \ncare after the imaging was completed.      \n Subsequently,  on  June  14,  2022,  the  Claimant  returned  to  Sherwood  Urgent  Care  for \nadditional medical care.  The nurse practitioner, Robyn Chreene, wrote that the Claimant had an \ninjury at work on April 18 [sic], 2022 and was seen there at the clinic.  Per these medical notes, \nthe Claimant had a CT of the head performed on April 26, 2022, and received the results on April \n28, 2022.  The nurse practitioner noted that the Claimant was told to come back for clearance to \nreturn  to  work,  but  she  never  returned.    At  that  time,  the  Claimant  reported  that  her  employer \nrefused to return her to work until she was 100%, but she does not feel 100%.  The Claimant stated \nthat she did not know what to do and wanted to know what she should do given her condition.  She \nreported that she continued to have right-sided neck pain from the initial injury although her X-\nrays of the C-spine were normal.  But the Claimant denied numbness or tingling or any radiation \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n21 \n \nof  pain  down  her  arm.  At  that  time,  the  Claimant  reported  that  she  hurt  her  back  in  a  separate \nincident on May 11, 2022, lifting something.  They ordered physical therapy and noted that they \nwould move forward with an MRI of the neck and shoulder if the Claimant did not improve with \ntherapy.  Although Nurse Chreene continued the Claimant on light duty, she stated that she did not \nfeel  the  Claimant  needed  to  be  placed  completely  off  work.    On  physical  examination,  the \nClaimant’s ROM was noted to be normal in her neck as well as her shoulder with no radiculopathy \nsymptoms.  Specifically, Speed wrote, “Low suspicion for rotator cuff injury or cervical nerve root \nimpingement from work injury.” \n On June 28, 2022, the Claimant presented for follow-up care on her neck and back pain \nunder  the  care  of  Robyn  Chreene,  NP.    She  reported  that  she  had  her  first  physical  therapy \nappointment on July 7, 2022.  The Claimant had not returned to work.  She stated that the muscle \nrelaxers caused her to be nauseated.  Therefore, she had been using ice or heat to the affected area.  \nPer  these  clinical  notes,  Nurse Chreene called the Claimant’s boss to get clarification on the \navailability of light duty work and due to her boss stating she had to be a 100% before returning \nto  work.    Specifically,  the  nurse  practitioner wrote, “At the last visit the patient stated  she  was \ninjured at work on 5/11 as well as reinjuring her right shoulder and neck. Discussed with patient \nthat her boss states she was no longer employed with them and that she was unsure if this was still \ncovered with workers [sic] comp as she was not an employee.”  The nurse practitioner instructed \nthe  Claimant  to  alternate  ice  and  heat  to  her  shoulder;  continue  with  anti-inflammatory;  attend \nphysical therapy as needed; and to follow-up as needed.         \n The Claimant underwent evaluation for physical therapy on July 7, 2022, at Levi Hospital. \nDalton Steele PT, DPT, Cert. DN authored a Physical Therapy Initial Evaluation physical therapy \nnote.    Physical  Therapist  Steele  noted  that  the  Claimant  presented  to  the  therapy  clinic  with \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n22 \n \ncomplaints of right shoulder pain following a work-related accident.  In particular, the Claimant \nreported she was kicked by a horse in mid-April.  She stated that she was kicked on the left side \nand fell onto the concrete on her right side.  Of significance, the Claimant stated that she sought \ntreatment from Sherwood Urgent Care and was told she suffered a concussion.  She reported that \nher concussion symptoms resolved but she has been having a lot  of pain and difficulty with her \nright shoulder.  The Claimant stated she believed she needed an MRI for her shoulder due to sharp \nand burning pain in her shoulder that does not seem to go away. \n An MRI of the Claimant’s cervical spine was performed on November 16, 2022, with an \nimpression of “At C5-6  there  is  moderate  right  neural  foraminal  stenosis  nerve  impingement.  \nMultilevel degenerative disc and facet changes.” \n William James, CRNA, for Dr. John Pace evaluated the Claimant on December 19, 2022.  \nAt that time, the Claimant reported joint pain, muscle pain, muscle cramps, neck pain, middle back \npain, muscle stiffness and lower back pain.  On physical examination, the Claimant was noted to \nhave cervical spine stiffness and decreased ROM, along with thoracic tenderness among symptoms \nrelated to the lumbar spine.  James performed a right C5/6 epidural steroid injection. \nThe last medical record is from January 3, 2023. The Claimant was seen at the office of \nDr.  John  Pace  under  the  care  of  James,  CRNA.    At  that  time,  the  Claimant  was  assessed  with \n“Radiculopathy, cervical region.”  She continued with the symptoms noted above.  However, the \nClaimant reported improvement with paresthesia in her fingers since the right ESI on the right C5-\n6, which was performed on December 19, 2022.              \nThe  non-medical  exhibits  include  an  Oaklawn  Accident  Report,  which  was  authored  by \nPatrick Bradbury, EMTB.  It reads, in relevant part:  \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n23 \n \nDescription of Accident: EMS was sitting in the paddock watching the 3\nrd\n race when the \n#8 horse Chaos Magic reared up and caused the patient to slam onto the ground injuring \nher elbow and head.  EMS checked her out and gave her two cold compresses.  She [the \nClaimant] declined an ambulance and signed an AMA. \nAdditionally,  I  have  reviewed  a  copy  of  the  video  surveillance  of  the  April  16,  2022, \nincident.  Although the incident was somewhat captured on video, it does not show a direct view \nof the incident.  However, it does show that there was some kind of commotion in one of the stalls \nwith a horse rearing up.          \nAdjudication \nCompensability  \nThe Claimant has asserted a compensable  neck injury on April 16, 2022, while working \nfor the respondent-employer.  \n \"Compensable  injury\"  means  an  accidental  injury  causing  physical  harm  to  the  body, \narising out of and in the course of employment and which requires medical services or results in \ndisability  or  death.    Ark.  Code  Ann.  §  11-9-102(4)(A)(i).    A  compensable  injury  must  be \nestablished   by   medical   evidence   supported   by   objective   findings.      Ark.   Code   Ann.   § \n11-9-102(4)(D).   The Claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he sustained \na compensable injury. Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4) (E)(i). \n  After  reviewing  the  evidence  in  this  case  impartially,  without  giving  the  benefit  of  the \ndoubt to either party, I find that the Claimant proved by a preponderance of the credible that she \nwas injured on April 16, 2022, while working for Milligan Racing.   \nHere, it is undisputed that the Claimant was involved in a work-related accident on April \n16,  2022.    Specifically,  the  Claimant  credibly  testified  that  she  was  injured  on  April  16  while \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n24 \n \nworking  for  Milligan  Racing.    Her  testimony  demonstrates  that  she  was  injured  when  a  horse \nreared up and caused her to fall to the ground, landing on her right side.  I found the Claimant’s \ntestimony to be credible in this regard and the incident took place in the presence of Mr. Milligan \nand several other people.  The Claimant’s testimony was corroborated by surveillance video of the \nincident, the EMT’s report of injury, and the initial medical reports.   \n Although  the  Claimant  initially  declined  medical  treatment  that  day,  she  later  requested \nmedical  attention  and  Mrs.  Milligan  referred  her  to  the  Sherwood  Urgent  Care  Clinic, in  Hot \nSprings.  Medical records show that the Claimant was initially seen at the clinic on April 18, 2022, \nunder the care of Pamela Speed, a nurse practitioner.  According to this medical note, the Claimant \ncomplained of pain in her shoulder and neck.  X-rays performed of the Claimant’s cervical spine \nwere  normal  and  did  not  show  any  fractures  or  broken  bones.  The  Claimant  was  physically \nexamined by the nurse practitioner. Based on her physical examination of the Claimant, the nurse \npractitioner  opined,  among  other  things, that the Claimant’s neck had “mild  neck  spasm,”  for \nwhich she ordered a medication regimen that included a muscle relaxant, Robaxin.   Hence, this \nfinding of “mild neck spasm” establishes an injury to the Claimant’s neck by medical  evidence \nsupported by objective findings. The Claimant  was diagnosed as having “Cervicalgia, (m54-2) – \nIllness, Acute,” and placed on restricted work duty.  \n Therefore,  based  on  all  of  the  foregoing,  I  find  that  the  Claimant  has  met  all  of  the \nrequirements  for  establishing  a  compensable  injury  to  her  neck.    Thus,  I  therefore  find  that  the \nClaimant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained a compensable injury to \nher  neck  on  April  16,  2022,  during  and  in  the  course  of  her  employment  with  the  respondent-\nemployer/Milligan Racing. \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n25 \n \n I recognize the Claimant underwent an MRI of the cervical spine on November 16, 2022, \nwhich revealed that at “C5-6 there is moderate right neural foraminal stenosis nerve impingement.”  \nHowever, I am not persuaded that these findings are related to the Claimant’s April 16, 2022, \nwork-related  injury  due  to  the  following  reasons:  Specifically,  on  April  18,  X-rays  of  the \nClaimant’s cervical spine were normal.    It  was  not  until  after  the  May  11,  2022,  work-related \nincident  that  the  cervical  spine  abnormalities  were  revealed.    Here,  both  the  Claimant  and  her \nhusband credibly testified that she was “reinjured” in May. The Claimant returned to Sherwood \nUrgent  Care  on  April  21  and  stated  her  symptoms  had  resolved  and  the  ROM  in  her  neck  was \nnormal.  At that time, medical staff instructed the Claimant to return for a follow-up visit to the \nSherwood Urgent Care Clinic to get clearance to return to work.  However, the Claimant failed to \nreturn  to  the  clinic  as  directed  to  obtain  clearance  to  return  to  work.    More  importantly,  the \nClaimant  did  not  seek  further  medical  treatment/follow-up  care  until  after  the  May  11  lifting \nincident.  Hence, the Claimant continued working her regular full-time and even more laborious \nemployment duties for Milligan Racing after the April 16 incident and did not stop working until \nafter the second incident in May.   \nB. Medical Benefits \nAn employer shall promptly provide for an injured employee such medical treatment as \nmay be reasonably necessary in connection with the injury received by the employee.  Ark. Code \nAnn. § 11-9-508(a).   \nThe  Claimant  proved  that  the  treatment  of  record  that  she  received  for  her  neck  injury \nduring  the  April  18  and  21,  2022  visits  to  Sherwood  Urgent  Care  were  reasonably  necessary \ntreatment for diagnosing and evaluating her compensable neck injury of April 16, 2022. On April \n21, the Claimant returned to the clinic for follow-up care and indicated her symptoms had resolved \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n26 \n \nand the ROM in her neck was normal.  At that time, they directed the Claimant to return for a \nfollow-up visit for clearance to return to  work.   However, the Claimant became non-compliant \nand failed to return for a follow-up visit to get clearance to return to full duty work.  Moreover, \nno doctor has recommended any further treatment for the Claimant’s neck injury of April 16, \n2022.  Hence, the Claimant did not seek additional treatment for her neck until after the second \nincident, which occurred on May 11.  \nBased on the foregoing, I find the Claimant failed to prove her entitlement to any further \ntreatment for her neck injury, including the care recommended by Dr. John Pace.   \nI recognize that it is well-established in workers’ compensation law that a Claimant may \nbe entitled to ongoing medical treatment after the healing period has ended.  However, I do not \nfind that to be the case in this instance.      \nTherefore, I find that the Respondents are liable for the aforementioned medical treatment \nof record, namely, the two visits to Sherwood Urgent Care on April 18, and April 21, 2022.    \nC.  Temporary Total Disability Compensation  \nHere, the Claimant contends that she is entitled to temporary total disability benefits for \nher neck injury of April 16, 2022, beginning on May 13, 2022, and continuing until January 13, \n2023.     \nAn injured employee for an unscheduled injury is entitled to temporary total disability \ncompensation during the time that she is within her healing period and totally incapacitated from \nearning wages.  Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department v. Breshears, 272 Ark. \n244,  613  S.W.2d  392  (1981).    The  healing  period  is  that  period  for  healing  of  the  injury  which \ncontinues until the employee is as far restored as the permanent character of the injury will permit.  \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n27 \n \nNix v. Wilson World Hotel, 46 Ark. App. 303, 879 S.W.2d 457 (1994).  If the underlying condition \ncausing the disability has become stable and nothing further in the way of treatment will improve \nthat  condition,  the  healing  period  has  ended. Id.    Temporary  total  disability  cannot  be  awarded \nafter the Claimant’s healing period has ended.  Trader v. Single Source Transportation, Workers’ \nCompensation Commission E507484 (February 12, 1999). \n The  Claimant  failed  to  prove  her  entitlement to  any  temporary  total  disability  for  her \ncompensable cervical injury of April 16, 2022, because she was never totally incapacitated from \nearning her regular wages.       \n Of significant importance is the fact that although the Claimant was placed on light duty \nfollowing her April 16, 2022, work-related neck injury, the Claimant admitted that she continued \nworking for Mr. Milligan, performing her regular duties, and receiving her regular pay until her \nemployment ended with him in May 2022.  At that point, according to the Claimant’s testimony \nand that of her husband, she was injured a second time while moving a fridge or dryer.  However, \nthis injury is not a claim presently before the Commission. \nMoreover, I find that the Claimant’s healing period for her neck injury ended no later than \nApril 21, 2022.  At that point, the Claimant reported to the medical staff at the urgent care clinic \nthat her symptoms had resolved.  In addition to this, the Claimant failed to return to the clinic for \na follow-up visit to get clearance for work as instructed.  Hence, the Claimant failed to meet the \nrequirements of the waiting period under Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-501(a); AWCC Rule 099.09.   \nAccordingly, I find that the Claimant failed to prove her entitlement to any temporary total \ndisability compensation for her cervical spine injury of April 16, 2022.   \nIn  light  of  the  foregoing,  the  issue  relating  to a controverted attorney’s  fee  has  been \nrendered moot and discussed in this Opinion.        \n\nBeals- H204976 \n \n28 \n \n                AWARD \nThe Claimant proved that she sustained a compensable injury to her cervical spine on  \nApril 16, 2022.  Also, the Claimant proved her entitlement to the medical treatment of record that \nshe received on April 18 and 21, 2022 her compensable neck injury of April 16, 2022.   However, \nthe Claimant failed to prove her entitlement to any temporary total disability compensation.   \nTherefore, the issue relating to a controverted attorney’s fee has been rendered moot and \nnot addressed in this Opinion.   \nAll issues not litigated herein are reserved 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.: H204976 LYNA M. BEALS, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT MILLIGAN RACING (ALLEN MILLIGAN), EMPLOYER RESPONDENT LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, INSURANCE CARRIER RESPONDENT LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP, THIRD PARTY ADMINSTRATOR (TPA) RESPONDENT OPINION FILED APRIL 19, 2023 H...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:08:39.521Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H204976-2023-04-19","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads//BEALS_LYNA_H204976_20230419.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}