{"id":"alj-H308104-2024-09-11","awcc_number":"H308104","decision_date":"2024-09-11","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Ptaricia Castellano","employer_name":"Integrity, Inc","title":"CASTELLANO VS. INTEGRITY, INC. AWCC# H308104 September 11, 2024","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:6","granted:2","denied:1"],"injury_keywords":["knee"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Castellano_Ptaricia_H308104_20240911.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"Castellano_Ptaricia_H308104_20240911.pdf","text_length":6757,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nWCC NO. H308104 \n \nPATRICIA CASTELLANO, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nINTEGRITY, INC., \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n \nATA WORKERS’ COMP. SI TRUST, \nCARRIER                                                                                                             RESPONDENT \n \nRISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, \nTPA                                                                                                                       RESPONDENT \n \n \nOPINION FILED SEPTEMBER 11, 2024 \n \nHearing conducted on Tuesday, September 10, 2024, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission  (the  Commission),  Administrative  Law  Judge (ALJ) Steven  Porch,  in Little  Rock, \nPulaski County, Arkansas. \n \nThe Claimant, Ms. Patricia Castellano, pro se, of Jacksonville, Arkansas, did not appear in person \nat the hearing.  \n \nThe Respondents were represented by the Honorable Carol Worley, Little Rock, Arkansas. The \nHonorable Melissa Wood, law partner of Ms. Carol Worley, argued the motion. \n \n \nBACKGROUND \n \n  This  matter  comes  before  the  Commission  on  a  Motion  to  Dismiss  by  Respondents.  A \nhearing was conducted on September 10, 2024, in Little Rock, Arkansas. No testimony was taken \nin  the  case.  Claimant, who according  to  Commission  records  is pro  se, failed  to  appear  at  the \nhearing. \nThe  Claimant  worked  for  the  Respondent/Employer  as  a delivery  driver. The date  for \nClaimant’s  alleged injury   was   on December 1,   2023. She   reported   her injury   to \nRespondent/Employer on December 4, 2023. Admitted into evidence was Respondents Exhibit 1, \npleadings and correspondence,  consisting  of 10 pages. I  have  also  blue-backed Form  AR-1, a \n\nCASTELLANO, AWCC No. H308104 \n \n2 \n \ncertified return receipt dated July 13, 2023, copy of certified envelope received August 29, 2024, \nand copy of hearing notice, as discussed infra. \nThe record reflects on December 15, 2023, a Form AR-1 was filed with the Commission \npurporting that claimant was a Direct Care Supervisor for Respondent/Employer. That she injured \nherself when, at a client’s home while getting out of bed to use the restroom, she slipped, fell, and \ninjured  her  right  foot. On December  18, 2023,  a  Form  AR-2 was  filed  in  this  case, denying \ncompensability of the claim. On January 2, 2024, Claimant filed a Form AR-C through her then-\nattorney, Mark Peoples, purporting an alleged foot and knee injury. Attorney Carol Worley entered \nher appearance on behalf of the Respondents on January 9, 2024. Attorney Peoples filed a Motion \nto Withdraw as Counsel that was granted on April 15, 2024, citing differences of opinions in how \nto prosecute claim. This motion was granted by the Full Commission on May 3, 2024. \nThe Respondents next filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 9, 2024, requesting this claim be \ndismissed for a lack of prosecution. The Claimant was sent, certified and regular U.S. Mail, notice \nof the Motion to Dismiss from my office on July 11, 2024, her last known address. The certified \nnotice was claimed by Claimant on July 13, 2024. Also, the notice sent regular U.S. Mail was not \nreturned to the Commission. Claimant did not respond to the notice in writing as required. Thus, \nin accordance with applicable Arkansas law, the Claimant was mailed due and proper legal notice \nof Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss hearing date at her current address of record via the United \nStates Postal Service (USPS), First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, and regular \nFirst-Class  Mail,  on August 7,  2024.  The  certified notice  was returned  to  the  Commission \nunclaimed but the regular First-Class mail notices were not returned. The hearing took place on \nSeptember 10, 2024. As mentioned before, the Claimant did not show up to the hearing. \n \n\nCASTELLANO, AWCC No. H308104 \n \n3 \n \n \nFINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n \nTherefore,  after  a  thorough  consideration  of  the  facts,  issues,  the  applicable  law,  and the \nevidentiary record, I hereby make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: \n \n1. The Commission has jurisdiction over this claim. \n \n2. The  Claimant and  Respondents  both  had  reasonable  notice of  the September 10, \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 \nDISCUSSION \n Consistent with AWCC Rule 099.13, the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing, \nwith reasonable notice, on the Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss. Though the hearing notice was \nunclaimed and returned to the Commission on August 29, 2024, the same notice was also sent to \nthe Claimant’s address of record by First-Class U.S. Mail on May 10, 2024, and did not return to \nthe  Commission.  The  Claimant  is  responsible  for  providing  the  Commission  with  her current \naddress. The  Commission  is  responsible  for  providing  reasonable  notice  of  a  hearing  to  the \nClaimant.  Sending  a  hearing  notice  to  the  last  known  address  that  was  provided  to  it  by  the \nClaimant is reasonable. Thus, I find by the preponderance of the evidence that reasonable notice \nwas 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  her Form  AR-C  on \n\nCASTELLANO, AWCC No. H308104 \n \n4 \n \nJanuary 2, 2024. Since then, Claimant has not made a demand for a hearing or has taken any other \naction in furtherance of this claim. In this regard, the Claimant has failed to do the bare minimum \nin prosecuting her claim. Therefore, I do find by the preponderance of the evidence that Claimant \nhas  failed  to  prosecute  her claim by failing to request a hearing. Thus, Respondents’ Motion to \nDismiss should be granted. \n \nCONCLUSION \n Based  on  the Findings  of Fact  and Conclusions  of Law set forth above, Respondents’ \nMotion to Dismiss is denied. \n \n      IT IS SO ORDERED.  \n \n \n                                                                                               ______________________________ \n                                                                                               Steven Porch \n                                                                                               Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H308104 PATRICIA CASTELLANO, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT INTEGRITY, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT ATA WORKERS’ COMP. SI TRUST, CARRIER RESPONDENT RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED SEPTEMBER 11, 2024 Hearing conducted on Tuesday, September 10, 2024, be...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:48:46.631Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H308104-2024-09-11","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Castellano_Ptaricia_H308104_20240911.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}