{"id":"alj-H304678-2026-03-30","awcc_number":"H304678","decision_date":"2026-03-30","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Bruce Roberts","employer_name":"City Of Jonesboro","title":"ROBERTS VS. CITY OF JONESBORO AWCC# H304678 March 30, 2026","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:10","granted:3"],"injury_keywords":["shoulder","rotator cuff"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Roberts_Bruce_H304678_20260330.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"Roberts_Bruce_H304678_20260330.pdf","text_length":5754,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nWCC NO. H304678 \n \nBRUCE ROBERTS, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nCITY OF JONESBORO, \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n \nMUNICIPAL LEAGUE WC PROGRAM, \nCARRIER/TPA                                                                                                    RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION FILED MARCH 30, 2026 \n \nHearing conducted on Friday, February  27,  2026, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission  (the  Commission),  Administrative  Law  Judge (ALJ) Steven  Porch,  in Jonesboro, \nCraighead County, Arkansas. \n \nThe Claimant is Pro Se, of Jonesboro, Arkansas.  \n \nThe Respondents were represented by Ms. Mary K. Edwards, Attorney at Law, North Little Rock, \nArkansas. \n \n \nI.  BACKGROUND \n This matter comes before the Commission on a Motion to Dismiss filed by Respondents \non December  15, 2025.    A  hearing  on  the  motion  was  conducted  on February  27,  2026,  in \nJonesboro, Arkansas.  Claimant, according to Commission file is Pro Se, failed to appear at the \nhearing.  \nThe  Claimant  worked  for  the  Respondent/Employer  as a fire  fighter.  The  date  for \nClaimant’s  alleged  injury  was  on June   17,   2023. This   incident   was   reported   to   the \nRespondent/Employer on the  same  date. Admitted  into  evidence  was Respondents’ Exhibit 1, \npleadings, and correspondence, consisting of 10 pages, and Commission Ex. 1, emails, and U.S. \nMail return receipts, consisting of 4 pages, as discussed infra. \n\nROBERTS, AWCC No. H304678 \n \n2 \n \nThe record reflects on July 26, 2023, a Form AR-1 was filed with the Commission noting \nthat Claimant injured his left shoulder while lifting the dump tank from a tanker. Also on July 26, \n2023, a Form AR-2 was filed accepting claim as medical-only. On August 22, 2023, a Form AR-\n2 was filed no longer accepting or denying compensability. On March 21, 2025, a Form AR-C was \nfiled purporting that Claimant sustained a torn rotator cuff injury in his left shoulder in a work-\nrelated incident.  \nThe Respondents filed a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution on December 15, 2025. \nThe Claimant was sent, on December 19, 2025, notice of the Motion to Dismiss, via certified and \nregular U.S. Mail, to his last known address. The certified motion notice was claimed by Claimant \nas noted on the December 24, 2025, return receipt. This notice was also sent regular U.S. Mail and \ndid  not  return  to  the  Commission. Despite  this,  the  Claimant  did not respond  to the  Motion,  in \nwriting, as required. Thus, in accordance with applicable Arkansas law, the Claimant was mailed \ndue and proper legal notice of Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss hearing date at his current address \nof record via the United States Postal Service (USPS), First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt \nRequested, and regular First-Class Mail, on January 21, 2026. The certified notice was claimed as \nnoted by the January 28, 2026, return receipt. Likewise, the hearing notice sent regular First-Class \nwas  not  returned  to  the  Commission. The  hearing  took  place  on February 27,  2025.  And  as \nmentioned before, the Claimant did not show up to the hearing. \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\nROBERTS, AWCC No. H304678 \n \n3 \n \n \n2. The  Claimant  and  Respondents  both  had  reasonable  notice  of  the February 27, \n2026, hearing. \n \n3. Respondents have proven by the preponderance of the evidence that Claimant has \nfailed to prosecute his claim under 11 C.A.R. §25-110(d) (formerly AWCC Rule \n099.13).  \n \n4. The Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted. \n \n5. This claim is hereby dismissed without prejudice.     \n \n \nIII.  DISCUSSION \n 11 C.A.R. §25-110(d) 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 11  C.A.R. §25-110(d), the  Commission  scheduled  and  conducted  a \nhearing,  with  reasonable  notice, on  the Respondents’ Motion  to Dismiss. The  certified  hearing \nnotice was claimed by Claimant, per the return postal notice bearing the January 28, 2026, date. \nThus, I find by the preponderance of the evidence that reasonable notice was given to the Claimant.  \nFurthermore, 11 C.A.R. §25-110(d) allows the Commission, upon meritorious application, \nto dismiss an action pending before it due to a want of prosecution. The Claimant filed his Form \nAR-C on March 21, 2025. Since then, he has failed to prosecute his claim. Therefore, I do find by \nthe  preponderance  of  the  evidence  that  Claimant  has  failed  to  prosecute  his claim.  Thus, \nRespondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted. \n \n\nROBERTS, AWCC No. H304678 \n \n4 \n \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. H304678 BRUCE ROBERTS, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT CITY OF JONESBORO, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT MUNICIPAL LEAGUE WC PROGRAM, CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MARCH 30, 2026 Hearing conducted on Friday, February 27, 2026, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commissi...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:31:24.835Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H304678-2026-03-30","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Roberts_Bruce_H304678_20260330.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}