{"id":"alj-H208850-2024-11-26","awcc_number":"H208850","decision_date":"2024-11-26","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Rickey White","employer_name":"Little Rock Hauling","title":"WHITE VS. LITTLE ROCK HAULING AWCC# H208850 November 26, 2024","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:9","granted:3"],"injury_keywords":["shoulder","hip","back"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/White_Rickey_H208850_20241126.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"White_Rickey_H208850_20241126.pdf","text_length":8644,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nWCC NO. H208850 \n \nRICKEY WHITE, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nLITTLE ROCK HAULING, \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n \nINDEMNITY INS. CO. OF NORTH AMERICA, \nINSURANCE CARRIER                                                                                     RESPONDENT  \n \nESIS, INC., \nTPA                                                                                                                        RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION FILED NOVEMBER 26, 2024 \n \nHearing conducted on Wednesday, November 6,   2024,  before  the  Arkansas  Workers’ \nCompensation Commission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Steven Porch, in \nLittle Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nThe Claimant, Mr. Rickey White, Pro Se, of Benton, Arkansas, did appear in person at the hearing.  \n \nThe Respondents were represented by the Honorable Melissa Wood, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n \nI.  BACKGROUND \n This matter comes before the Commission on a Motion to Dismiss filed by Respondents.  \nA hearing on the motion was conducted on November 6, 2024, in Little Rock, Arkansas.  Claimant, \naccording to Commission file, is Pro Se.  \nThe Claimant worked for the Respondent/Employer as a driver. The date for Claimant’s \nalleged injury was on November 17, 2022. He reported his injury to Respondent/Employer that \nsame day. Respondents admitted into evidence Respondents’ Exhibit 1, pleadings, consisting of 8 \npages. Also admitted  into  evidence  was  blue-backed Pre-Hearing  Order  filed  July  19,  2023, \nMelissa Wood letter dated August 4, 2023, Melissa Wood letter dated January 6, 2023, a copy of \n\nWHITE, AWCC No. H208850 \n \n2 \n \ncertified  return  receipt returned  to  the  Commission dated October  19,  2024, a  copy  of  certified \nreturn receipt returned to the Commission on September 27, 2024, and copy of hearing notice, as \ndiscussed infra. \nThe record reflects on December 20, 2022, a Form AR-C was filed with the Commission, \nby then-attorney, Laura Beth York, purporting that Claimant injured his right shoulder, right hip, \nand right arm. Attorney Melissa Wood entered her appearance on behalf of the Respondents on \nDecember 28, 2022. On January 5, 2023, a Form AR-1 was filed with the Commission purporting \nthat  Claimant’s injuries  occurred  when  he tripped  over  an  iron  stopper. On January  6,  2023, \nRespondents  filed  a  letter, on  the  behalf  of  Respondents, accepting  compensability  of  the  right \nshoulder, and right upper leg injuries. The letter also confirmed that benefits were being paid. A \nPre-Hearing Conference was held on July 19, 2023, and a subsequent Pre-Hearing Order was filed \nthe  same  date. On  January  5,  2023,  a  Form  AR-2  was  filed by  Respondents with  no  language \ndenying compensability of the injury.  \nOn July 19, 2023, a prehearing telephone conference was held followed by a Pre-Hearing \nOrder  filed  the  same  day. The Order  scheduled  a  full  hearing  for  September  20,  2023,  at  the \nCommission. On August 4,  2023, Respondents  submitted  a  letter  agreeing  to  the  surgery  the \nClaimant wanted and requested that the September 20, 2023, hearing be canceled since no other \nissues were in dispute. The request was granted, and the full hearing was canceled. On August 8, \n2024, Claimant’s counsel filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel. The Full Commission granted \nClaimant’s counsel Motion on August 30, 2024.  \nThe  Respondents  next filed  a Motion to  Dismiss  on September  6,  2024, requesting  this \nclaim be dismissed for a lack of prosecution. The Claimant was sent, certified and regular U.S. \nMail, notice of the Motion to Dismiss from my office on September 11, 2024, to his last known \n\nWHITE, AWCC No. H208850 \n \n3 \n \naddress. The certified motion notice was unclaimed by Claimant as noted on the September 27, \n2024,  return  receipt. The motion notice that was sent  regular  U.S.  Mail  was  not  returned  to  the \nCommission. Claimant did not provide a new address of record. Nevertheless, in accordance with \napplicable Arkansas law, the Claimant was mailed due and proper legal notice of Respondents’ \nMotion to Dismiss hearing date at his current address of record via the United States Postal Service \n(USPS),  First  Class  Certified  Mail,  Return  Receipt  Requested,  and  regular  First-Class  Mail,  on \nOctober 3, 2024. The certified notice was not claimed according to the October 19, 2024, return \nnotice; but the regular First-Class mail hearing notice was not returned to the Commission. The \nhearing took place on November 6, 2024. And as mentioned before, the Claimant did show up to \nthe hearing. \nThe  Claimant  agreed  to  the  Motion  to  Dismiss  during  the  hearing.  I  have  advised  the \nClaimant, several times, that he does have the right to hire other counsel since his former attorney, \nLaura Beth York, withdrew from his case. I have further advised him of the Commission’s legal \nadvisers  that  could  assist  him,  for  free,  with  his  claim. Despite  the  repeated  admonition  the \nClaimant  expressed  his  need  to  work  and  that  he  will  not  contest  the  dismissal.  Claimant  did, \nhowever, voice his concern about the worsening of his injury since he continues to feel numbness. \nClaimant also advised that he has received his last benefit payment a week before this scheduled \nmotion hearing. The Claimant and Respondents’ counsel had a conversation off record about \nfuture claims. There the Claimant learned that he could refile his claim within a year of his last \nbenefit  payment;  something  he  expressed  when  all  parties  were  back  on  the  record. With  this \nunderstanding, the Claimant again expressed to the Commission, that he agrees with the dismissal \nwithout prejudice. \n \n\nWHITE, AWCC No. H208850 \n \n4 \n \n \nII.  FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n After reviewing the record as a whole and other matters properly before the Commission, \nI hereby make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with Ark. Code \nAnn. § 11-9-704 (Repl. 2012):  \n1. The Commission has jurisdiction over this claim. \n \n2. The  Claimant  and  Respondents  both  had  reasonable  notice  of  the November 6, \n2024, hearing. \n \n3. Respondents have proven by the 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 \n \nIII.  DISCUSSION \n AWCC 099.13 provides: \nUpon  meritorious  application  to  the  Commission  from  either  party  in  an  action \npending before the Commission, requesting that the claim be dismissed for want of \nprosecution, the Commission may, upon reasonable notice to all parties, enter an \norder dismissing the claim for want of prosecution. \n \nSee generally Johnson v. Triple T Foods, 55 Ark. App. 83, 85, 929 S.W.2d 730 (1996).   \nConsistent with AWCC Rule 099.13, the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing, \nwith  reasonable  notice, on  the Respondents’ Motion  to Dismiss. Though  the  certified  hearing \nnotice was unclaimed, that same notice was also sent to the Claimant’s address of record by First-\nClass U.S. Mail on October 3, 2024, and did not return to the Commission. The Claimant appeared \n\nWHITE, AWCC No. H208850 \n \n5 \n \nat  the  hearing  and  argued  his  position. Thus,  I  find  by  the  preponderance  of  the  evidence  that \nreasonable 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 \nDecember  20, 2023. Since the filing of Claimant’s Form AR-C  then,  he  has  failed  to  request  a \nhearing. Moreover,  the  Claimant has  verbally  agreed on  the  record, to  the  dismissal  without \nprejudice. Therefore, I do find by the preponderance of the evidence that Claimant has failed to \nprosecute his claim by failing to request a hearing. Thus, Respondents’ 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, and Claimant’s claim is dismissed without prejudice. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n      ________________________________ \n      STEVEN PORCH \n      Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H208850 RICKEY WHITE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT LITTLE ROCK HAULING, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT INDEMNITY INS. CO. OF NORTH AMERICA, INSURANCE CARRIER RESPONDENT ESIS, INC., TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 26, 2024 Hearing conducted on Wednesday, November 6, 2024, bef...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:46:57.306Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H208850-2024-11-26","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/White_Rickey_H208850_20241126.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}