{"id":"alj-H205431-2023-10-18","awcc_number":"H205431","decision_date":"2023-10-18","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Sarah Loge","employer_name":"Dollar General Store","title":"LOGE VS. DOLLAR GENERAL STORE AWCC# H205431 OCTOBER 18, 2023","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:4","denied:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads//LOGE_SARAH_H205431_20231018.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"LOGE_SARAH_H205431_20231018.pdf","text_length":7503,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H205431 \n \nSARAH LOGE, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nDOLLAR GENERAL STORE, \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n \nDOLGENCORP, LLC, d/b/a DOLLAR GENERAL/ \nSEDGWICK CLAIMS MG’T, INC., \nINSURANCE CARRIER/TPA                                                                     RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION AND ORDER FILED OCTOBER 18, 2023, \nGRANTING RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE \n \nHearing conducted on Tuesday, October 17, 2023, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Little Rock, \nPulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Ms. Sarah Loge, pro se, of Conway, Faulkner County, Arkansas, failed and/or \nrefused to appear at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable David C. Jones, Newkirk & Jones, Little \nRock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n A hearing was conducted on Tuesday, October 17, 2023, to determine whether this claim \nshould be dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a)(4) (2023 \nLexis Replacement) and Commission Rule 099.13 (2023 Lexis Repl.). \n The respondents filed a motion to dismiss and brief in support thereof with the Commission \non August 7, 2023, requesting this claim be dismissed either with or without prejudice for lack of \nprosecution. In accordance with applicable Arkansas law, the claimant was mailed due and proper \nlegal notice of the respondents’ motion to dismiss, as well as a copy of the hearing notice at his \naddresses of record via the United States Postal Service (USPS), First Class Certified Mail, Return \nReceipt requested. Thereafter, the claimant never responded to the subject motion to dismiss, nor \n\nSarah Loge, AWCC No. H205431 \n2 \n \ndid  she  request  a  hearing,  or  contact  and/or  try  to  contact  the  Commission  by  any  means  of \ncommunication.  The  last  time  the  claimant  corresponded  with  the  Commission  was  by  a  type-\nwritten letter dated August 17, 2022, some 14 months ago, wherein she requested to “appeal’ the \nrespondents’  denial  of  her  claim,  and  she  requested  a  hearing. (Respondents’  Exhibit  1,  and \nComms’n’s file). However, thereafter, the claimant never made any effort whatsoever to pursue \nand/or  prosecute  her  claim.  Moreover,  she  failed  and/or  refused  to  cooperate  in  the  discovery \nprocess or to provide the respondents’ attorney with responses to the respondents’ interrogatories \nand requests for production of documents, and she failed and/or refused to provide the respondents \na signed medical release. \n The  record  herein  consists  of  the  hearing  transcript  and  any  and  all  exhibits  contained \ntherein and/or 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 \nin Dillard 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 her claim as required by the applicable statute and Commission rule. \nMoreover, and significantly, since the alleged date of injury of August 4, 2021, the respondents \ncontroverted  this  claim  in  its  entirety  and  never  paid  any  medical  and/or  indemnity  benefits. \nConsequently, the applicable statute of limitations (S/L) expired on August 4, 2023, and therefore, \nthe plain language of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Act (the Act) compels me to dismiss \nthis  claim  with  prejudice. The  ALJ  also  notes  the  respondents’  well-reasoned  and  well-written \n\nSarah Loge, AWCC No. H205431 \n3 \n \nmotion to dismiss and brief in support thereof filed with the Commission on August 7, 2023 – as \nwell  as  the  preponderance  of  the  evidence  of  record  conclusively  demonstrating  that  more  than \ntwo (2) years have passed since the alleged injury date of August 4, 2021, and the claimant has not \nreceived any medical and/or indemnity and/or any other benefits, and certainly has not received \nany benefits whatsoever within the last one (1) year – sets forth more than sufficient facts and legal \nprecedent to warrant a dismissal with prejudice in this particular claim. \n Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the facts, issues, the applicable law, and other \nrelevant matters of record, I hereby make the following: \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’ motion to  \n   dismiss, as well as due and legal notice of the subject hearing, the claimant \n   failed and/or refused to respond to the motion in any way whatsoever, and \n      she failed and/or refused to appear at the subject hearing. Therefore, she has \n      waived her right to a hearing on the respondents’ motion to dismiss.  \n \n3.   Moreover, the claimant has failed to prosecute her claim in any way \n      whatsoever, and has to date failed and/or refused to cooperate in the \n      discovery process, including but not limited to failing and/or refusing to \n      respond to the respondents’ routine and reasonable interrogatories and \n      requests for production of documents, and she has failed and/or refused to \n      provide the respondents’ a signed medical authorization.  \n   \n4.   Therefore, since the alleged date of injury is August 4, 2021; and the \n      respondents denied this claim in its entirety and have not paid any medical \n      and/or indemnity benefits; as well as for all the reasons set forth above in \n      the “Discussion” section of this opinion and order, and the respondents’ \n      motion to dismiss with or without prejudice and brief in support thereof, the \n      Act compels me to GRANT the respondents’ motion to dismiss filed with \n      the Commission on August 7, 2023, with prejudice based on the specific \n      facts and applicable law, pursuant to both Ark. Code Ann. Section 11-9- \n     702(a)(4) and Commission Rule 099.13. \n \n\nSarah Loge, AWCC No. H205431 \n4 \n \n  Of course, the claimant may appeal the decision set forth in this opinion and order within \nthe  applicable  deadline.  The  ALJ  strongly  encourages  the  claimant  to  retain  the  services  of  an \nattorney should she wish to do so.  \n The  respondents  shall  pay  the  court  reporter’s  invoice  within  twenty  (20)  days  of  their \nreceipt thereof. \n IT IS SO ORDERED.                                                                                                                                       \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 \n \n \nMP/mp","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H205431 SARAH LOGE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT DOLLAR GENERAL STORE, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT DOLGENCORP, LLC, d/b/a DOLLAR GENERAL/ SEDGWICK CLAIMS MG’T, INC., INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER FILED OCTOBER 18, 2023, GRANTING RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DIS...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:01:51.508Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H205431-2023-10-18","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads//LOGE_SARAH_H205431_20231018.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}