{"id":"alj-H208593-2023-10-25","awcc_number":"H208593","decision_date":"2023-10-25","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Miller Wright","employer_name":"Tractor Supply Co","title":"WRIGHT VS. TRACTOR SUPPLY CO. AWCC# H208593 OCTOBER 25, 2023","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:8","granted:4"],"injury_keywords":["wrist"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Wright_Miller_H208593_20231025.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"Wright_Miller_H208593_20231025.pdf","text_length":5018,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H208593 \n \nMILLER D. WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE  CLAIMANT \n \nTRACTOR SUPPLY CO., \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                RESPONDENT \n \nSTARR SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO. \nINSURANCE COMPANY                                                                          RESPONDENT  \n \nSTARR SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO. \nTHIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR                                                                          RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION FILED OCTOBER 25, 2023 \n \nHearing  before  Administrative  Law  Judge  Steven  Porch  on  October 24,  2023  in  Little \nRock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant represented himself, Pro Se. \n \nThe  Respondents  were  represented  by  Mr.  Eric  Newkirk,  Attorney  at  Law,  Little  Rock, \nArkansas. \n \nI.  BACKGROUND \n This  matter  comes  before  the  Commission  on  a  Motion  to  Dismiss  filed  by \nRespondents on August 3, 2023.  A hearing on the motion was conducted on October 24, \n2023,  in  Little  Rock,  Arkansas.    Claimant  represented  himself,  Pro  Se.  However,  the \nClaimant was not present at the hearing. Respondents were represented at the hearing \nby  Mr.  Eric  Newkirk,  Attorney  at  Law,  of  Little  Rock,  Arkansas.    In  addition  to \nRespondent’s argument,   the   record   consists   of Respondent’s   Exhibit  1   and the \nCommission’s file–which has been incorporated herein in its entirety by reference. \n The  evidence  reflects  that Claimant’s  injury  occurred  on December  20,  2021, \nwhere he tried to retrieve a cat that got out of a kennel. The cat bit and scratched his right \npointer  finger,  right  thumb,  and  right  wrist. This  incident  allegedly  occurred  during  the \n\nMILLER H208593 \n \n \n2 \ncourse and scope of his employment. Since filing his Form C on December 9, 2022, this \ncase  has  been  inactive  until  Respondents  filed  a  Motion  to  Dismiss  due  to  the  lack  of \nprosecution.  A hearing  was  held  on  October 24,  2023,  in  Little  Rock,  Arkansas  on  the \nMotion to Dismiss. As previously stated, the Claimant was not present for the hearing. \nII.  FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n After  reviewing  the  record  as  a  whole  and  other  matters  properly  before  the \nCommission,  I  hereby  make  the  following  findings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of  law  in \naccordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-704 (Repl. 2012): \n1. The  Arkansas  Workers’  Compensation  Commission  has  jurisdiction  over  this \nclaim. \n2. All parties received reasonable and timely notice of the Motion to Dismiss and the \nhearing thereon pursuant to AWCC R. 099.13. \n3. Respondents  did  prove  by  a  preponderance  of  the  evidence  that  Claimant has \nfailed to prosecute his claim under AWCC R. 099.13. \n4. The Motion to Dismiss should be, and hereby is, granted without prejudice. \nIII.  DISCUSSION \n AWCC 099.13 provides: \nUpon  meritorious  application  to  the  Commission  from  either  party  in  an \naction  pending  before  the  Commission,  requesting  that  the  claim  be \ndismissed for want of prosecution, the Commission may, upon reasonable \nnotice  to  all  parties,  enter  an  order  dismissing  the  claim  for  want  of \nprosecution. \n \nSee generally Johnson v. Triple T Foods, 55 Ark. App. 83, 85, 929 S.W.2d 730 (1996).   \nUnder  Ark.  Code  Ann.  §  11-9-705(a)(3)  (Repl.  2012),  Respondents  must  prove  by  a \npreponderance  of  the  evidence  that  dismissal  should  be  granted.  The  standard \n\nMILLER H208593 \n \n \n3 \n“preponderance of the evidence” means the evidence having greater weight or convincing \nforce.  Barre v. Hoffman, 2009 Ark. 373, 326 S.W.3d 415; Smith v. Magnet Cove Barium \nCorp., 212 Ark. 491, 206 S.W.2d 442 (1947). \n A claimant’s testimony is never considered uncontroverted.  Nix v. Wilson World \nHotel,  46  Ark.  App.  303,  879  S.W.2d  457  (1994).  The  determination  of  a  witness’ \ncredibility and how much weight to accord to that person’s testimony are solely up to the \nCommission. White v. Gregg Agricultural Ent., 72 Ark. App. 309, 37 S.W.3d 649 (2001).  \nThe Commission must sort through conflicting evidence and determine the true facts.  Id.  \nIn so doing, the Commission is not required to believe the testimony of the claimant or \nany other witness, but may accept and translate into findings of fact only those portions \nof the testimony that it deems worthy of belief.  Id. \n After consideration of all the evidence, I find that Claimant and Respondents were \ngiven reasonable notice for the Motion to  Dismiss hearing under Rule 13. I further find \nthat Claimant has abridged this rule. Thus I find Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss should \nbe granted. \nCONCLUSION \n Based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth above, Respondents’ \nMotion to Dismiss is hereby granted without prejudice. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n      ________________________________ \n      STEVEN PORCH \n      Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H208593 MILLER D. WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT TRACTOR SUPPLY CO., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT STARR SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO. INSURANCE COMPANY RESPONDENT STARR SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO. THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR RESPONDENT OPINION FILED OCTOBER 25, 2023 Hearing before A...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:02:06.272Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H208593-2023-10-25","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Wright_Miller_H208593_20231025.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}