{"id":"alj-H304138-2024-06-28","awcc_number":"H304138","decision_date":"2024-06-28","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Bryan Taylor","employer_name":null,"title":"TAYLOR VS. CENTRAL ARKANSAS AUTO PAINTINGAWCC# H304138June 28, 2024","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:6","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Taylor_Bryan_H304138_20240628.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"Taylor_Bryan_H304138_20240628.pdf","text_length":10872,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO.: H304138 \n \n \nBRYAN TAYLOR, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                                 CLAIMANT \n \nCENTRAL ARKANSAS AUTO PAINTING,   \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                            RESPONDENT     \n \nEMPLOYERS PEFERRED INSURANCE, \nTHIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR/TPA                                                            RESPONDENT                  \n \nOPINION FILED JUNE 28, 2024   \n \nHearing before  Administrative Law Judge Chandra  L.  Black, in Little  Rock, Pulaski County, \nArkansas. \n \nClaimant, pro se, failed to appear at the hearing.        \n \nRespondents represented by the Honorable Erin Rambo, Attorney at Law, Fort Smith, Arkansas. \n \n                                                  STATEMENT OF THE CASE      \n \n A hearing was held on June 19, 2024 , in the present matter pursuant to Dillard v. Benton \nCounty Sheriff’s Office,  87  Ark.  App.  379,  192  S.W.  3d  287  (2004),  to  determine  whether  the \nabove-referenced matter should be dismissed for failure to prosecute under the provisions of Ark. \nCode Ann. §11-9-702 (a)(4), and Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission Rule 099.13.  \nAppropriate Notice of this hearing was had on all parties to their last known address, in the \nmanner prescribed by law.   \n The record consists of the transcript of the June 19, 2024, hearing and the documents held \ntherein.  Commission’s Exhibit No. 1 includes sixteen (16) pages consisting of the Form AR-C, \npleadings, and various correspondence.   \n No testimony was taken. \n \n\nTAYLOR – H304138 \n \n2 \n \n                                                            Procedural History \n On June 29, 2023, the Claimant filed a Form AR-C with the Commission alleging that he \nsustained  a compensable  injury during  the  course  and  in  the  scope  of  his employment with  the \nrespondent-employer on April 19, 2023.  Specifically, per this document, the Claimant alleged that \nhe sustained two hernias while performing his employment duties.  According to the Claimant’s \naccount of how his injury occurred, he stated that he was told to lift a truck bed off a frame and \nmove it.  He maintained that the straining caused two hernias in his lower abdomen.  The Claimant \nlisted on  the  Form  AR-C  that he  was  requesting  initial  benefits  in  the  form  of  temporary  total \ndisability compensation and medical expenses.  \n  The  respondent-insurance-carrier  filed  a  Form  AR-2, with  the  Commission  on July  27, \n2023, wherein  they controverted compensability of  the  claim.   The Respondents stated, “No \ncoverage.  AM Trust Financial Service, Inc. is not the carrier of record for the insured and the date \nof loss.”     \nSince the filing of the Form AR-C, there has been no affirmative action taken on the part \nof  the  Claimant  to  prosecute  his  claim, or  otherwise  pursue any  type  of benefits.  In  fact,  the \nClaimant has not ever filed a request for a hearing in this matter.  \nTherefore, on or about May 1, 2024, the Respondents filed a Motion to Dismiss, with the \nCommission,  along  with a  Certificate  of  Service  to  the Claimant.  Per  this  documentation,  the \nRespondents  confirmed  that  they  served  a  true  and  correct  copy  of  the above  and foregoing \npleading, which was to be forwarded the Claimant by way of first-class mail on that same day, via \nregular mail with the United States Postal Service.          \n\nTAYLOR – H304138 \n \n3 \n \n  The  Commission  sent  a letter to  the Claimant on May  2,  2024, informing him of the \nRespondents’ motion, and a deadline of twenty (20) days, for filing a written response.  This notice \nwas sent via first-class and certified mail with the Postal Service.   \nOn May 6, 2024, the Postal Service informed the Commission that this item was delivered \nto  the Claimant’s home and  left  with  an  individual.  The  proof  of  delivery appears  to  bear the  \nsignature of a certain recipient of this parcel of mail as being a Joseph Patrick.  However, the letter \nnotice sent to the Claimant by first-class mail has not been returned to the Commission.  \nYet, there was no response from the Claimant.   \n  Pursuant to a Hearing Notice dated May 20, 2024, the Commission notified the parties that \nthis matter had been set for a hearing on the Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss. Said hearing was \nscheduled for June 19, 2024, at 12:00 p.m., at the Commission, in Little Rock, Arkansas.  This \nnotice of the dismissal proceedings was sent via first-class and certified mail with the United States \nPostal Service.   \nThe tracking information received from the Postal Service shows that they delivered the \nnotice of the dismissal proceedings to the Claimant’s residence on May 23, 2024.   Information \nreceived from the Post Office by the Commission shows that an individual at the Claimant’s home \nsigned  for the Hearing Notice  and  took  delivery  of  this  parcel  of  mail.    The  signature  of  the \nrecipient for delivery shows that the notice of the dismissal proceedings was left with an individual \nby the name of Joseph Patrick.  The notice of the dismissal hearing sent to the Claimant by first-\nclass  mail  has  not  been  returned  to  the  Commission. Therefore,  the evidence before  me \npreponderates that the Claimant received notice of the dismissal hearing.   \nStill, there was no response from the Claimant.     \n\nTAYLOR – H304138 \n \n4 \n \nNevertheless,  a dismissal hearing  was  in  fact  conducted  on the  Respondents’ motion as \nscheduled.    The Claimant did  not appear at the hearing.    However, the  Respondents appeared \nthrough  their  attorney.  The  Respondents’  attorney asserted  that  the Claimant  has  failed  to \nprosecute his claim for workers’ compensation benefits and that it should be dismissed for want \nof prosecution.  Counsel further noted that the Claimant has not asked for a hearing since the filing \nof the Form AR-C, which was done more than six (6) months ago.  Therefore, the Respondents’ \nattorney essentially moved that  this  claim  be  dismissed  based  on  the  time  timing  of  the  events \ndescribed above and the history of the claim involving a lack of prosecution under Ark. Code Ann. \n§11-9-702, and Commission Rule 099.13. \n                                        Adjudication \nThe statutory provisions and Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Rule applicable in this \nmotion for dismissal of this claim are outlined below:  \nSpecifically, Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702(a)(4) provides:  \nIf within six (6) months after the filing of a claim for compensation, no bona fide \nrequest for a hearing has been made with respect to the claim, the claim may, upon \nmotion and after hearing, be dismissed without prejudice to the refiling of the claim \nwithin the limitation periods specified in subdivisions (a)(1)-(3) of this section. \n \nCommission Rule 099.13 reads:  \n \nThe Commission may, in its discretion, postpone or recess hearings at the instance \nof either party or on its own motion.  No case set for hearing shall be postponed \nexcept by approval of the Commission or Administrative Law Judge. \n \nIn the event neither party appears at the initial hearing, the case may be dismissed \nby  the  Commission  or  Administrative  Law  Judge,  and  such  dismissal  order  will \nbecome  final  unless  an  appeal  is  timely  taken  therefrom  or  a  proper  motion  to \nreopen  is  filed with  the  Commission  within  thirty  (30)  days  from  receipt  of  the \norder. \n \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 \n\nTAYLOR – H304138 \n \n5 \n \nprosecution, the Commission may, upon reasonable notice to all parties, enter an \norder dismissing the claim for want of prosecution.  (Effective March 1, 1982) \n \n \nMy review of the evidence shows that the Claimant has had ample time to pursue his claim \nworkers’ compensation benefits, but he has failed to do so.  Specifically, the Claimant has not ever \nrequested a hearing or otherwise attempted to prosecute his claim for benefits since the filing of \nthe Form AR-C, which was done more than six (6) months ago.  Most notably, the Claimant has \nnot  responded  to  the  Notices  of  this  Commission, nor  has  he contested the  dismissal  request or \nobjected to his claim being dismissed.           \nTherefore, after consideration of the evidence before me, I find the Respondents’ Motion \nto  Dismiss to  be  well  taken.  Accordingly, pursuant  to  Ark. Code  Ann. §11-9-702 (a)(4), and \nCommission  Rule  099.13,  this  claim for workers’ compensation benefits is  hereby dismissed \nwithout  prejudice to  the  refiling of  it within  the limitation  period specified by the  applicable \nlimitation period. \n       FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \nOn  the  basis  of  the  record  as  a  whole,  I  hereby  make  the  following  findings  of  fact  and \nconclusions of law in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-704. \n1. The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of this \nclaim.  \n \n2. The Respondents  filed  with  the  Commission a Motion to  Dismiss this   \nclaim, for want of prosecution for which a hearing was held. \n \n3. The Claimant has not requested a hearing since the filing of the Form AR-\nC,  which  was done more  than  six  (6)  months  ago.    Hence,  the evidence \npreponderates  that  the  Claimant  has  failed  to  prosecute  his  claim  for \nworkers’ compensation benefits based upon the relevant provisions of the \nspecified statute, Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702 (a)(4), and Rule 099.13 of this \nCommission.       \n \n\nTAYLOR – H304138 \n \n6 \n \n4. Appropriate Notice of the dismissal hearing was had on all parties to their \nlast known address, in the manner prescribed by law.    \n \n            5. The Respondents’ motion for dismissal of this claim for want of prosecution \nis  hereby  granted, without  prejudice, under  the  provisions  of Ark.  Code \nAnn. §11-9-702 (a)(4),  and  Commission  Rule  099.13,  to  the  refiling  of  it \nwithin the limitation period specified by law.  \n \n                                            ORDER \n \n Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I have no alternative \nbut  to  dismiss  this  claim  for more workers’ compensation benefits.  This  dismissal is  hereby \nordered pursuant  to  Ark.  Code  Ann.  §11-9-702 (a)(4), and Commission  Rule  099.13, without \nprejudice to the refiling of this claim within the limitation period specified under the Act. \n          IT IS SO ORDERED. \n    \n                    \n____________________________________ \n             Chandra L. Black \n       Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO.: H304138 BRYAN TAYLOR, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT CENTRAL ARKANSAS AUTO PAINTING, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT EMPLOYERS PEFERRED INSURANCE, THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JUNE 28, 2024 Hearing before Administrative Law Judge Chandra L. Black, in Litt...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:53:32.400Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H304138-2024-06-28","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Taylor_Bryan_H304138_20240628.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}