{"id":"alj-H207385-2024-07-09","awcc_number":"H207385","decision_date":"2024-07-09","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Bruce Overman","employer_name":"American Greetings","title":"OVERMAN VS. AMERICAN GREETINGS AWCC# H207385July 9, 2024","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:9","granted:3"],"injury_keywords":["back"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Overman_Bruce_H207385_20240709.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"Overman_Bruce_H207385_20240709.pdf","text_length":6375,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nWCC NO. H207385 \n \nBRUCE OVERMAN, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nAMERICAN GREETINGS CORP., \nSELF-INSURED/EMPLOYER                                                                           RESPONDENT  \n \nAMERICA ZURICH INS. CO., \nCARRIER/THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR                                             RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION FILED JULY 9, 2024 \n \nHearing conducted on Wednesday, June 28, 2024, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission  (the  Commission),  Administrative  Law  Judge (ALJ) Steven  Porch,  in Jonesboro, \nCraighead County, Arkansas. \n \nThe Claimant, Mr. Bruce Overman, pro se, of Blytheville, Arkansas, did not appear in person at \nthe hearing.  \n \nThe Respondents were represented by the Honorable Eric Newkirk, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n \nBACKGROUND \n \n  This  matter  comes  before  the  Commission  on  a  Motion  to  Dismiss  by  Respondents.  A \nhearing was conducted on June 28, 2024, in Jonesboro, Arkansas. No testimony was taken in the \ncase. Claimant, who according to Commission records is pro se, failed to appear at the hearing. \nAdmitted into evidence was Respondent Exhibit 1, pleadings, and correspondence, consisting of \nfifty-seven pages. I have also blue-backed Forms AR-1, AR-2, and AR-C, as discussed infra. \nThe  record  reflects on October  13,  2022,  a  Form  AR-C was  filed by Claimant’s then-\nattorney, Scott Hunter, reflecting that he purportedly injured his back on February 7, 2022. How \nhe injured his back was not stated in this form. Claimant requested a hearing on October 31, 2022. \nBased on this request, prehearing documents were sent out and returned followed by a prehearing \ntelephone  conference that  took  place on  February 15,  2023.  A  prehearing  order  was  filed on \n\nOVERMAN, AWCC No. H207385 \n \n2 \n \nFebruary 22, 2023, setting the full hearing for April 14, 2023, in Jonesboro, Arkansas. The full \nhearing was continued and reset by letter dated April 19, 2023, for June 9, 2023. On May 31, 2023, \nthe parties again requested a continuance and that the file be sent to general files. This request was \ngranted  on  June  2,  2023.  Respondents next filed  a  Motion  to  Dismiss  on  January  8,  2024.  The \nbases for the motion were a lack of prosecution by the Claimant. Claimant was sent certified notice \nof the Motion to Dismiss from the Commission on January 24, 2024. The Claimant received that \nnotice on January 27, 2024, at his last known address. The Claimant had twenty days to respond \nto the Motion to Dismiss. The Claimant did not respond to the Motion to Dismiss.  \nIn the interim, Claimant’s attorney, Scott Hunter, filed a Motion to Withdraw as counsel \non February 22, 2024. This motion was granted on February 27, 2024. And since the Claimant has \nfailed to object to both the Motion to Withdraw and the Motion to Dismiss in writing, a hearing \nnotice for  the  Motion  to  Dismiss must  be  sent  out.  Therefore,  in  accordance  with  applicable \nArkansas  law,  the Claimant  was  mailed  due  and  proper  legal  notice  of the  hearing  date via  the \nUnited States Postal Service (USPS), First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, and \nregular First-Class Mail. The certified notice was served on May 16, 2024. Likewise, the regular \nFirst-Class mail hearing notice was not returned to the Commission. The  hearing took place on \nJune 28, 2024. And as previously mentioned, the Claimant did not show up to the hearing. \nFINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n \nTherefore,  after  a  thorough  consideration  of  the  facts,  issues,  the  applicable  law,  and the \nevidentiary record, I hereby make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: \n \n1. The Commission has jurisdiction over this claim. \n \n2. The Claimant and Respondents both had reasonable notice of the June 28, 2024, \nhearing. \n \n\nOVERMAN, AWCC No. H207385 \n \n3 \n \n3. Respondents  have  proven  by  a preponderance  of  the  evidence  that Claimant  has \nfailed to prosecute his claim under AWCC Rule 099.13.  \n \n4. The Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted. \n \n5. This claim is hereby dismissed without prejudice.     \n \nDISCUSSION \n Consistent with AWCC Rule 099.13, the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing, \nwith proper notice, on  the Respondents’ Motion  to Dismiss. Commission  Exhibit  1  provides \nmultiple Certified U.S. Mail Return Receipts. One receipt dated May 16, 2024, was claimed by \nthe Claimant. This receipt establishes that the Motion to Dismiss hearing notice was served on the \nClaimant. Respondents’ counsel was at the hearing and argued the motion. Thus, I  find  by  the \npreponderance of the evidence that reasonable notice was given to both parties.  \nAWCC Rule 099.13 allows the Commission, upon meritorious application, to dismiss an \naction  pending  before  it  due  to  a  want  of  prosecution. The  Claimant  filed his Form AR-C on \nOctober  13,  2022.  Claimant  immediately  requested  a  hearing and has  since then requested \ncontinuances  for  the  two  hearings  that  were  set. When  notice  of  the  Motion  to  Dismiss  was \nreceived by Claimant on January 27, 2024, he failed to respond to the Motion by objecting and \nrequesting  another hearing  in  writing. Moreover,  despite  receiving  the  hearing  notice  for  the \nMotion to Dismiss, Claimant failed to appear. The Claimant has clearly abandoned his claim by \nnot doing the bare minimum in prosecuting his claim. Therefore, I do find by the preponderance \nof the evidence that Claimant has failed to prosecute his claim by failing to request a hearing. Thus, \nRespondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted. \n \n \n \n\nOVERMAN, AWCC No. H207385 \n \n4 \n \nCONCLUSION \n Based  on  the Findings  of Fact  and Conclusions  of Law set forth above, Respondents’ \nMotion to Dismiss is granted, without prejudice. \n \n      IT IS SO ORDERED.  \n \n \n                                                                                               ______________________________ \n                                                                                               Steven Porch \n                                                                                               Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H207385 BRUCE OVERMAN, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT AMERICAN GREETINGS CORP., SELF-INSURED/EMPLOYER RESPONDENT AMERICA ZURICH INS. CO., CARRIER/THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JULY 9, 2024 Hearing conducted on Wednesday, June 28, 2024, before the Arka...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:50:59.411Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H207385-2024-07-09","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Overman_Bruce_H207385_20240709.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}