{"id":"alj-H305143-2025-03-10","awcc_number":"H305143","decision_date":"2025-03-10","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Tracey Ford","employer_name":"Radius Aerospace, Inc","title":"FORD VS. RADIUS AEROSPACE, INC. AWCC# H305143 March 10, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:2","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/FORD_TRACEY_H305143_20250310.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"FORD_TRACEY_H305143_20250310.pdf","text_length":5145,"full_text":"1 \n \nBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H305143 \n \n \nTRACEY J. FORD, \nEMPLOYEE CLAIMANT \n \nRADIUS AEROSPACE, INC., \nEMPLOYER RESPONDENT \n \nSTARR SPECIALITY INS. CO./ \nSEDGWICK CLAIMS MG’T SERVICES, INC. \nCARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE \nFILED MARCH 10, 2025 \n \n \nHearing conducted on Friday, March 7, 2025, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Hot Springs, \nGarland County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Ms. Tracey J. Ford, pro se, of Hot Springs, Garland County, Arkansas, failed \nand/or refused to appear at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable Kevin J. Staten, The Laser Law Firm, Little \nRock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n A hearing was conducted on Friday, March 7, 2025, to determine whether this claim should \nbe dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a)(4) (2025 Lexis \nReplacement) and Commission Rule 099.13 (2025 Lexis Replacement). \n The claimant herein previously was represented by counsel. By unanimous order filed June \n25, 2024, the Full Commission granted the claimant’s counsel’s request to withdraw as her \nattorney of record. Thereafter on November 13, 2024, the respondents’ attorney filed the subject \nmotion to dismiss for lack of prosecution (MTD). (Respondents’ Exhibit 1 at ???). In compliance \n\nTracey J. Ford, AWCC No. H305143 \n2 \n \nwith the applicable law the claimant was provided due and legal notice of the respondents’ MTD \nas well as the date, time, and location of the subject hearing by United States Postal Service (USPS) \nFirst Class Mail, Certified, Return Receipt Requested, which she received on November 18, 2024. \n(Commission Exhibit 1). The claimant did not respond in writing to the respondents’ motion in \nany way, and she failed and/or refused to appear at the subject hearing. \n The record herein consists of the hearing transcript and any and all exhibits contained therein \nand attached thereto. \nDISCUSSION \n Consistent with Ark. Code Ann.§ 11-9-702(a)(4) (2025 Lexis Repl.), as well as our court of \nappeals’ ruling in Dillard vs. Benton County Sheriff’s Office, 87 Ark. App. 379, 192 S.W.3d 287 \n(Ark. App. 2004), the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing on the respondents’ motion \nto dismiss. Rather than recite a detailed analysis of the record, suffice it to say the preponderance \nof the evidence introduced at the hearing and contained in the record conclusively reveals the \nclaimant has failed and/or refused to prosecute her claim at this time. \n Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the facts, issues, the applicable law, representations \nof counsel, and other relevant 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 due and legal notice of the respondents’ MTD without prejudice \nfiled November 13, 2024, as well as notice of the date, time, and place of the subject \nhearing, the claimant failed and/or refused to respond in any way to the respondents’ MTD, \nand she failed and/or refused to appear at the hearing. Therefore, the claimant is deemed to \nhave waived her right to a hearing on the respondents’ MTD. \n \n3. The respondents’ MTD without prejudice filed November 13, 2024, should be and hereby \nis GRANTED; and this claim is dismissed without prejudice to its refiling pursuant to the \n\nTracey J. Ford, AWCC No. H305143 \n3 \n \ndeadlines prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. Section 11-9-702(a) and (b), and Commission \nRule 099.13. \n \n This Order shall not be construed to prohibit the claimant, her attorney, any attorney she may \nretain in the future, or anyone acting legally and on her behalf from refiling the claim if it is refiled \nwithin 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 reporter’s \ninvoice 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 \n \n \nMP/mp \n \n \n \n\nTracey J. Ford, AWCC No. H305143 \n4","preview":"1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H305143 TRACEY J. FORD, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT RADIUS AEROSPACE, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT STARR SPECIALITY INS. CO./ SEDGWICK CLAIMS MG’T SERVICES, INC. CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE FILED MARCH 10, 2025","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:42:26.492Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H305143-2025-03-10","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/FORD_TRACEY_H305143_20250310.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}