{"id":"alj-H401004-2024-10-07","awcc_number":"H401004","decision_date":"2024-10-07","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Martha Alcantar","employer_name":"Kennametal, Inc","title":"ALCANTAR VS. KENNAMETAL, INC. AWCC# H401004 October 07, 2024","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:1","denied:1"],"injury_keywords":["carpal tunnel","wrist","repetitive","back"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/ALCANTAR_MARTHA_H401004_20241007.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"ALCANTAR_MARTHA_H401004_20241007.pdf","text_length":8601,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n   \n CLAIM NO.  H401004 \n \nMARTHA ALCANTAR, Employee                                                                   CLAIMANT \n \nKENNAMETAL, INC., Employer                                                               RESPONDENT \n \nSENTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier                                             RESPONDENT \n \n \n OPINION FILED OCTOBER 7, 2024 \n \nHearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE GREGORY K. STEWART in Springdale, \nWashington County, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant appearing pro se. \n \nRespondents represented by JARROD S. PARRISH, Attorney, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n \n STATEMENT OF THE CASE \n  \n On September  25,  2024,  the  above  captioned  claim  came  on  for  hearing  at \nSpringdale, Arkansas.  A pre-hearing conference was conducted on July 31, 2024 and a \npre-hearing order was filed on that same date.  A copy of the pre-hearing order has been \nmarked as Commission’s Exhibit #1 and made a part of the record without objection. \n At the pre-hearing conference the parties agreed to the following stipulations: \n 1.   The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of the \nwithin claim. \n 2.     The employee/employer/carrier  relationship  existed among  the  parties at all \nrelevant times. \n At the pre-hearing conference the parties agreed to litigate the following issues: \n1. Compensability of carpal tunnel syndrome. \n\nAlcantar – H401004 \n 2 \n2. Related medical. \n3. Temporary total disability benefits from January 7, 2024 through a date yet to  \nbe determined. \n4.   Statute of limitations. \n5.   Compensation rates. \n6.   Credit for disability benefits. \nAt the time of the hearing respondent reserved the issue of its entitlement to a \ncredit for disability benefits paid to claimant for short/long term disability. \n The claimant contends that she was working one job doing the same job everyday \nfor over ten years which led to severe carpal tunnel syndrome. \n The   respondents   contend   they   have   not   been   presented   with   evidence \nestablishing  the  existence  of  a  work-related  injury  (specific  incident  or  gradual  onset).  \nThe statute of limitations has run on claimant’s claim pursuant to Cottage Café  v. Collette. \n94 Ark. App. 72, 226 S.W. 3d 27 (2006) and La-Z-Boy  Manuf. v. Bruner, 2016 Ark. App. \n117, 484 S.W. 3d 700 (2016).\n From a review of the record as a whole, to include medical reports, documents, \nand other matters properly before the Commission, and having had an opportunity to hear \nthe testimony of the witness and to observe her demeanor, the following findings of fact \nand conclusions of law are made in accordance with A.C.A. §11-9-704: \n \n  FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n \n 1.   The stipulations agreed to by the parties at a pre-hearing conference conducted \non July 31, 2024 and contained in a pre-hearing order filed that same date are hereby \n\nAlcantar – H401004 \n \n3 \n \naccepted as fact. \n 2.   Claimant’s claim for compensation benefits is barred by the statute of \nlimitations.  A.C.A. §11-9-702(a)(1). \n \n FACTUAL BACKGROUND \n Claimant testified that she believes she  began working for respondent on July 16, \n2006.  She initially worked as a machine operator and for the last ten years worked in an \ninspection area.  At some point the claimant began having problems with both her hands \nand sought medical treatment from her primary care physician, Dr. Cheryl Fulton. \n Dr.  Fulton  initially  treated  claimant  with  medication  and  occupational  therapy \nbefore referring her to Dr. Johnson for an EMG/NCV study.  That testing was positive for \nbilateral  carpal  tunnel  syndrome.    According  to  claimant’s  testimony,  she  underwent \nsurgery on her right wrist on June 24, 2024. \n Claimant has filed this claim contending that she suffered a compensable injury in \nthe  form  of  bilateral  carpal  tunnel  syndrome.    She  seeks  payment  of  related  medical \nbenefits  as  well  as  temporary  total  disability  benefits  beginning  January  7,  2024,  and \ncontinuing through a date yet to be determined.  Also at issue is the claimant’s correct \ncompensation rate and respondent has raised as an issue the statute of limitations. \n \nADJUDICATION \n Claimant contends that she suffered a compensable injury in the form of bilateral \ncarpal tunnel syndrome as a result of her job activities with the respondent.  A claimant \nrequesting  workers’ compensation  benefits  for  a  gradual-onset  injury  must  prove by  a \npreponderance  of the evidence  (1)  the  injury  arose  out  of  and  in  the  course  of  her \n\nAlcantar – H401004 \n \n4 \n \nemployment;  (2)  the  injury  caused  internal  or  external  physical    harm  to  her  body  that \nrequired  medical  services  or  resulted  in  disability  or  death; and  (3)  the  injury  was  the \nmajor cause of the disability or need for treatment.  A.C.A. §11-9-102(4)(A)(ii) and (E)(ii).  \nBecause carpal tunnel syndrome is by definition a gradual onset injury, it is not necessary \nthat claimant prove that this injury was caused by rapid repetitive motion.  See Kildow v. \nBaldwin Piano & Organ, 333 Ark. 335, 969 S.W. 2d 190 (1998).   \n Here,  respondent  contends  that  claimant’s  claim  for  bilateral  carpal  tunnel \nsyndrome is barred by the statute of limitations.  A claim for compensation for disability \non account of an injury shall be barred unless filed with the Commission within two years \nfrom  the  date  of  the  compensable  injury.    A.C.A.  §11-9-702(a)(1).    The statute  of \nlimitations for gradual onset injuries, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, begins to run when \nthe  injury becomes apparent  to  the  claimant.     La-Z-Boy  Mfg.,  Inc. v.  Bruner, 216  Ark. \nApp. 117, 484 S.W. 3d 700; Pina v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 91 Ark. App. 77, 208 S.W. 3d \n236 (2005); and Cottage Café, Inc. v. Collette, 94 Ark. App. 72, 226 S.W. 3d 27 (2006).  \nThe claimant’s awareness that her injury is causally related to the working environment \nis not an element of the inquiry.  Pina, 91 Ark. App. at 85, 208 S.W. 3d at 240. \n Claimant admitted on cross examination that she was aware at the end of 2021 \nthat she had problems with her hands and she related those problems to her work. \n  Q By the end of 2021, you had recognized in your mind \n  that you had problems with both of your hands that you were \n  feeling were work-related; right? \n \n  A Correct. \n \n  Q And it is true that the symptoms you told me about in \n  your deposition and that  you told us about here today \n  were present back in late 2021? \n\nAlcantar – H401004 \n \n5 \n \n \n  A Yes.  Yes. \n \n      *** \n \n  Q So by the time you developed symptoms in both \n  hands at the end of 2021, you were thinking it was related \n  to work?  You recognized it was related to work? \n \n  A Yes. \n \n      *** \n \n  Q One last time, you agree you were aware of your \n  condition in both hands as of November 2021; correct? \n \n  A Yes. \n \n  Q And you were attributing your problem to work at \n  Kennametal at that time? \n \n  A Yes. \n \n \n Even though claimant was aware of the problems with her hands in late 2021 and \nshe attributed those problems to her work activities with the respondent, claimant did not \nfile  a  claim  for  workers’ compensation  benefits  until  Form  AR-C  was  filed  by  Attorney \nMark  Peoples  on  claimant’s  behalf  on  April  8,  2024. (An Order  granting  Mr.  Peoples’ \nMotion to Withdraw was entered by the Full Commission on May 23, 2024.)  Clearly, this \nis more than two years after the injury became apparent to the claimant.  Since more than \ntwo years had passed, claimant’s claim is barred by the statute of limitations. \n Accordingly,   for   the foregoing   reasons,   I   find   that   claimant’s   claim   for \ncompensation benefits is barred by the statute of limitations.  Claimant’s injury became \napparent to her in late 2021 when she had problems with her hands and attributed those \nproblems  to  her  work  activities  with  the  respondent.    However,  claimant  did  not  file  a \n\nAlcantar – H401004 \n \n6 \n \nworkers’ compensation claim until April 8, 2024, more than two years later. \n \nORDER \n Claimant’s claim for compensation benefits is barred by the statute of limitations.  \nTherefore, her claim for compensation benefits is hereby denied and dismissed. \n Respondent is liable for payment of the court reporter’s charges for preparation of \nthe hearing transcript in the amount of $379.50. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n \n      _____________________________________ \n       GREGORY K. STEWART \n       ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H401004 MARTHA ALCANTAR, Employee CLAIMANT KENNAMETAL, INC., Employer RESPONDENT SENTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier RESPONDENT OPINION FILED OCTOBER 7, 2024 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE GREGORY K. STEWART in Springdale, Washington County, Arkansas...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:47:24.581Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H401004-2024-10-07","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/ALCANTAR_MARTHA_H401004_20241007.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}