{"id":"alj-H403028-2025-03-31","awcc_number":"H403028","decision_date":"2025-03-31","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Leanna Fletcher","employer_name":"Quapaw Care & Rehab Center, LLC","title":"FLETCHER VS. QUAPAW CARE & REHAB CENTER, LLC AWCC# H403028 March 31, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:6","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":["hip","ankle"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/FLETCHER_LEANNA_H403028_20250331.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"FLETCHER_LEANNA_H403028_20250331.pdf","text_length":11579,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nAWCC CLAIM NO.: H403028 \n \n \nLEANNA FLETCHER, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                                 CLAIMANT \n \nQUAPAW CARE & REHAB CENTER, LLC,   \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                            RESPONDENT     \n \nINDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH \nAMERICA/SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT \nSERVICES, INC., CARRIER/TPA                                                                         RESPONDENT    \n                                                                                                                                \n          \nOPINION FILED MARCH 31, 2025   \n \nHearing held before Administrative Law Judge CHANDRA L. BLACK, in Hot Springs, Garland \nCounty, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant, Pro Se, did not appear at the hearing. \n \nRespondents represented  by the  Honorable Zachary  F.  Ryburn, Attorney  at  Law,  Little  Rock, \nArkansas. \n \n                                                  STATEMENT OF THE CASE      \n \n A hearing was held on March 28, 2025, in the present case to determine whether this claim \nfor initial Arkansas workers’ compensation should be dismissed for failure to prosecute under the \nprovisions of Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702 (Repl. 2012), and/or Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission Rule 099.13.  The dismissal hearing in this claim of initial benefits was held pursuant \nto  the  ruling  in Dillard v. Benton County Sheriff’s Office,  87  Ark.  App.  379,  192  S.W.  3d  287 \n(2004). \nAppropriate notice of this hearing was had on all parties to their last known address, in the \nmanner prescribed by law.   \nNo testimony was taken. \n\nFLETCHER - H403028 \n \n2 \n \nThe record consists of March 28, 2025, hearing transcript and the documents held therein.  \nCommission’s Exhibit consists of eighteen (18) pages of pleadings,  letters,  forms,  and  other \ntracking documents which were provided to the Commission by the United States Postal Service \nconcerning  delivery  information  for  notices  sent  to  the Claimant; and Respondents’ Exhibit 1 \nconsists of two (2) pages. \n                                                             Procedural History \n On May 7, 2024, the Claimant’s attorney filed with the Commission a claim for Arkansas \nworkers’ compensation benefits via a Form AR-C.  Per this document, the Claimant alleged that \nshe sustained injuries during the course and in the scope of her employment with the respondent-\nemployer.  According  to  this document,  the  Claimant asserted  that  she  sustained  injuries  to  her \nhip, and ankle in a work-related accident on April 28, 2024.  The Claimant’s attorney requested \nonly initial benefits.  In fact, her attorney checked all the boxes for every possible initial workers’ \ncompensation benefit allowed under the law. \n  On June 7, 2024, the respondent-insurance-carrier filed with the Commission a Form AR-\n2 stating  their  position  on  this  claim  for workers’ compensation benefits.  Per  this  form,  the \nRespondents denied the claim in its entirety.  Specifically, the carrier stated that the Claimant’s \ninjury did not arise out of nor in the course of the Claimant’s employment.  \n Also on June 7, the Claimant’s counsel sent an email to the Commission asking that the \nclaim be assigned to a judge for a hearing.  As a result, the claim was assigned to my office for \nadjudication and the hearing process was started.  On August 21, 2024, I entered a prehearing order \nin the case, which outlined the stipulations, issues, and contentions of the parties.  Per said order \nthe case was scheduled for a hearing in Hot Springs, Arkansas on November 22, 2024.   \n\nFLETCHER - H403028 \n \n3 \n \nHowever, on September 19, 2024, the Claimant’s attorney sent an email to the Commission \nstating: “Claimant hereby withdraws her hearing request.  Please return this claim to general files.”  \nI canceled the hearing and returned the claim to the Commission’s general files on that same day. \n  Additionally, on September 19, the Claimant’s attorney filed a motion/request to withdraw \nas counsel of record for the Claimant in this matter.  On October 18, 2024, the Full Commission \nentered an order granting the motion for the Claimant’s attorney to withdraw from representing \nher in this matter.  \n Since this time, the Claimant has not tried to pursue or otherwise resolve her claim, nor has \nshe made a bona fide request for a hearing June 7, 2024.    \n Therefore,  on January  14,  2025, the  Respondents filed a Motion  to Dismiss,  with  the \nCommission, along with a  certificate of service confirming that they had  emailed a copy of the \nmotion to the Claimant.   \nOn January 21, 2025, my office sent a letter/notice to the Claimant informing her of the \nRespondents’ motion, and a deadline of twenty (20) days, for filing a written response.  Said letter \nwas  mailed  to  the  Claimant via both  first-class  and  certified  mail.  Per tracking information \nreceived  from  the  United  States  Postal  Service, on February  5,  they  were  unable  to find any \ndelivery  information  in  their  records  on  this  item.   Subsequently,  this  item  was  returned  to  the \nCommission marked “unclaimed.”  However,  the letter  sent via first-class  mail  has  not  been \nreturned to the Commission.   \n   There was no response whatsoever from the Claimant.   \n Therefore, per a Hearing Notice sent to the parties on February 11, 2025, the Commission \nnotified them that this matter had been set for a hearing on Respondents’ motion for dismissal of  \n\nFLETCHER - H403028 \n \n4 \n \nthis claim due to a lack of prosecution.  Said dismissal hearing was scheduled for Friday, March \n28, 2025, in Hot Springs, at the Transportation Depot. \nSaid notice  was  mailed to  the  Claimant  by  both  first-class  and  certified  mail.   Per \ninformation received from the Postal Service on February 27, 2025, they were unable to find any \ndelivery  information  in  their  records  for  this  item. Subsequently,  this  item  was  returned  to  the \nCommission marked “unclaimed.” However,  the  letter  sent via first-class  mail  has  not  been \nreturned to the Commission.  Under these circumstances, I find that the Claimant received proper \nnotice of the hearing. \n Thus far, there has been no response whatsoever from the Claimant.   \nNevertheless,  the  hearing  was  held  as  scheduled.  The Claimant did  not appear at the \nhearing.  However, the Respondents’ counsel appeared at the hearing and argued that the Claimant \nhas  failed  to prosecute  her claim for workers’ compensation benefits. More  specifically, the \nRespondents’ attorney noted that the Claimant has not taken any action to advance her claim since \nthe filing of the request for a hearing by her former attorney, which was done more than six (6) \nmonths ago, and ultimately ended with the request for a hearing being withdrawn.  Therefore, the \nRespondents’ attorney moved that this claim be dismissed pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702, \nand/or Commission Rule 099.13 without prejudice.  \n                                                        Adjudication \nThe statutory provisions and Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Rule applicable in the  \nRespondents’ request for dismissal of this claim are outlined below:  \nSpecifically, Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-702(a)(4):  \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 limitation periods specified in subdivisions (a)(1)-(3) of this section. \n\nFLETCHER - H403028 \n \n5 \n \n \nAdditionally, Commission 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 \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            A thorough review of the evidence before me shows that the Claimant has had ample time \nto pursue her claim for initial benefits, but she has failed to do so.  Specifically, the Claimant has \nnot  requested  a  hearing  or  otherwise made  any  effort to  prosecute  her claim for  workers’ \ncompensation benefits since her former counsel filed a request for hearing, which was done over \nmore than six (6) months ago.  Of significance, the Claimant has failed to oppose the motion, and \nshe has not responded to the notices of this Commission.   \nHere, the evidence preponderates that the Claimant has failed to timely prosecute this claim \nfor workers’ compensation benefits.  Under these circumstances, I am convinced that the Claimant \nhas  abandoned her claim for  workers’  compensation  benefits. Accordingly, based  on the \npreponderance of the evidence presented before me, I find that the Respondents’ motion to dismiss \nfor a lack of prosecution to be well taken.  I thus find that pursuant to the provisions of Ark. Code \nAnn.§11-9-702 (Repl.  2012), and Commission  Rule  099.13,  this  claim for initial workers’ \ncompensation benefits is hereby respectfully dismissed, without prejudice, to the refiling within \nthe limitation period specified under the law. \n\nFLETCHER - H403028 \n \n6 \n \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 (Repl. 2012): \n1. The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of this \nclaim.  \n \n2. The Respondents filed with the Commission a motion for dismissal of this \nclaim, for which a hearing was held. \n \n3. Appropriate Notice of the dismissal hearing was had on all parties to their \nlast known address, in the manner prescribed by law.    \n \n            4. The Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss this claim for want of prosecution is \nhereby granted, without prejudice, pursuant to the provisions of Ark. Code \nAnn. §11-9-702, and Commission Rule 099.13, to the refiling of the claim \nwithin the specified limitation period.  \n \n                                                           ORDER \n \nBased upon the foregoing findings, I have no alternative but to dismiss this claim for initial \nArkansas workers’ compensation benefits.  This dismissal is pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-\n702, and Commission  Rule  099.13, without  prejudice, to  the  refiling  of  this claim  within the \nlimitation 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 AWCC CLAIM NO.: H403028 LEANNA FLETCHER, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT QUAPAW CARE & REHAB CENTER, LLC, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA/SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MARCH 31, 2025 Hearing held be...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:43:10.479Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H403028-2025-03-31","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/FLETCHER_LEANNA_H403028_20250331.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}