{"id":"alj-H207568-2023-08-16","awcc_number":"H207568","decision_date":"2023-08-16","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Jimmy Martinez","employer_name":"Tyson Poultry, Inc","title":"MARTINEZ VS. TYSON POULTRY, INC. AWCC# H207568 AUGUST 16, 2023","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:4","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/MARTINEZ_JIMMY_H207568_20230816.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"MARTINEZ_JIMMY_H207568_20230816.pdf","text_length":5518,"full_text":"1 \n \nBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H207568 \n \nJIMMY MARTINEZ, \nEMPLOYEE CLAIMANT \n \nTYSON POULTRY, INC., \nEMPLOYER RESPONDENT \n \nTYSON POULTRY, INC./ \nTYNET CORP. \nCARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION AND ORDER TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE \nFILED AUGUST 16, 2023 \n \nHearing conducted on Tuesday, August 15, 2023, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Little Rock, \nPulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Mr. Jimmy Martinez, pro se, of Hope, Hempstead County, Arkansas, failed and/or \nrefused to appear at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable J. Matthew Mauldin, Roberts Law Firm, \nLittle Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n A hearing was conducted on Tuesday, August 15, 2023, to determine whether this claim should \nbe dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a)(4) (2023 Lexis \nReplacement) and Commission Rule 099.13 (2023 Lexis Repl.). \n On June 19, 2023, the respondents filed with the Commission a motion to dismiss without \nprejudice (MTD) and brief in support thereof requesting that this claim be dismissed for lack of \nprosecution. Thereafter, pursuant to the applicable law and in advance of the hearing the claimant \nwas mailed a copy of the respondents’ MTD and the subject hearing notice via the United States \nPostal Service (USPS), Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, which he received on July 21, \n2023. (Commission’s Exhibit 1). Thereafter, the claimant failed and/or refused to object to the \n\nJimmy Martinez, AWCC No. H207578 \n2 \n \nrespondents’ MTD, or to respond in any way to either the Commission or the respondents; and he \nfailed and/or refused to appear at the subject hearing. According to respondents’ counsel, who \ncontacted and visited with the pro se claimant by telephone on June 23, 2023, his file notes reflect \nthe claimant advised him he no longer wished to pursue his claim, and he requested the \nrespondents’ attorney to not contact him any further about the matter. \n The record herein consists of the hearing transcript and any and all exhibits contained therein \nand 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 in \nDillard 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 his claim at this time. \n Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the facts, issues, the applicable law, and other \nrelevant 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 been mailed and received due and legal notice of both the respondents’ MTD \nand the subject hearing date, time, and place, the claimant neither inquired concerning nor \nobjected nor responded to the motion in any way, and he did not appear, nor cause anyone \nto appear on his behalf, at the subject hearing. Therefore, the claimant is deemed to have \nwaived his right to a hearing on the respondents’ motion to dismiss without prejudice. \n \n3. The claimant has to date failed and/or refused to request a hearing within the last six (6) \nmonths, and he has failed and/or refused to take any action(s) to prosecute his claim. \n \n\nJimmy Martinez, AWCC No. H207578 \n3 \n \n4. Therefore, the respondents’ motion to dismiss without prejudice filed June 19, 2023, is \nhereby GRANTED; and this claim hereby is dismissed without prejudice to its refiling \npursuant to the deadlines prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. Section 11-9-702(a) and (b), and \nCommission Rule 099.13. \n \n This Order shall not be construed to prohibit the claimant, his attorney, any attorney he may \nretain in the future, or anyone acting legally and on his behalf from refiling the claim if it is \nrefiled within the applicable time periods prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a) and (b). \n If they have not already done so, the respondents hereby are ordered to pay the court \nreporter’s invoice 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 \n \n \n \nMP/mp","preview":"1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H207568 JIMMY MARTINEZ, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT TYSON POULTRY, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT TYSON POULTRY, INC./ TYNET CORP. CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE FILED AUGUST 16, 2023","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:03:59.245Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H207568-2023-08-16","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/MARTINEZ_JIMMY_H207568_20230816.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}