{"id":"alj-H405925-2026-03-03","awcc_number":"H405925","decision_date":"2026-03-03","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Ashley Ritter","employer_name":"Ozark Adult Personal Care, LLC","title":"RITTER VS. OZARK ADULT PERSONAL CARE, LLC AWCC# H405925 March 03, 2026","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:7"],"injury_keywords":["ankle"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/RITTER_ASHLEY_H405925_20260303.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"RITTER_ASHLEY_H405925_20260303.pdf","text_length":3910,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H405925 \n \nASHLEY RITTER, EMPLOYEE      CLAIMANT \nOZARK ADULT PERSONAL CARE, \nLLC, EMPLOYER         RESPONDENT \nLIBERTY MUTUAL, CARRIER/TPA      RESPONDENT \n \nOPINION AND ORDER FILED MARCH 3, 2026 \nA Hearing before Administrative Law Judge James D. Kennedy in Batesville, \nArkansas, was held on February 25, 2026. \nClaimant was pro-se and failed to appear. \nRespondents were represented by Mike Ryburn, of Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n A hearing was held in the above styled matter on the 25\nth\n day of February 2026, in \nBatesville, Arkansas, on Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to prosecute pursuant \nto Arkansas Code Ann. 11-9-702 and 11 C.A.R. 25-110(d) which was previously named \nRule 099.13 of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission.  The claimant  was \npro se and failed to appear. The Respondents were represented by Mike Ryburn of Little \nRock, Arkansas. The Claimant had previously been represented by Mark Alan Peoples, \nwho  was  allowed  to  withdraw  by  an  Order  of  the  Full  Commission, dated October 31, \n2025.  \n A Motion to Dismiss was filed on November 5, 2025. An AR-C had been previously \nfiled on September 12, 2024, where the Claimant contended she had sustained injuries \nto multiple body parts including her right ankle, left arm, and spine, due to a motor vehicle \n\nRITTER – H405925 \n2 \n \naccident  on  July  31,  2024.  The  Claimant  filed  a Prehearing  Questionnaire on  April  9, \n2025. A hearing was set for the date of September 24, 2025, but was cancelled prior to \nthe hearing date by the Claimant. The Claimant was previously represented by Mark Alan \nPeoples,  who  was  allowed  to  withdraw  by  an  Order  from  the  Full  Commission,  dated \nOctober 31, 2025. The Claimant has made no request for a hearing and has taken no \nsteps after requesting that her hearing be cancelled to pursue and prosecute her claim, \nor to request a hearing. \n After proper and reasonable notice, a hearing was held on February 25, 2026, and \nthe Claimant failed to appear. The Respondents were represented by Mike Ryburn, who \nrequested  that  the  matter  be  dismissed  pursuant  to 11  C.A.R.  110(d)  of  the  Arkansas \nWorkers’ Compensation Commission and the  provisions  of Arkansas Code Ann.  11-9-\n702.   \n Arkansas  Code  Annotated  11-9-702  provides  that  if  within  six  months  after the \nfiling of a claim for compensation, if no bona fide request for a hearing has been made \nwith respect to the claim, the claim may upon motion and after a hearing, be dismissed \nwithout  prejudice.  Additionally, 11  C.A.R.  110  (d)  provides  that  upon  a  meritorious \napplication from either party in an action pending before the Commission, requesting that \nthe claim be dismissed for want of prosecution, the Commission may, upon reasonable \nnotice to all the parties, enter an order dismissing the claim for want of prosecution. Here, \nit is found that reasonable notice to all the parties was provided and that the Claimant has \nnot made a bona fide request for a hearing within six months of the filing of her claim. \n \n \n\nRITTER – H405925 \n3 \n \nORDER \n Pursuant to the above statement of the case, documents entered into the record, \nand statements by the Attorney for the Respondents, there is no alternative but to grant \nthe Motion  to  Dismiss without  prejudice pursuant  to 11  C.A.R.  110(d) of  the  Arkansas \nWorkers’ Compensation Commission and Arkansas Code Ann. 11-9-702, based upon the \nClaimant failing to prosecute her claim within the last six months and after a meritorious \napplication to the Commission by the Respondent requesting that the claim be dismissed \nafter reasonable notice to all parties. \nIT IS SO ORDERED. \n                \n      ____________________________ \n                JAMES D. KENNEDY \n               ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H405925 ASHLEY RITTER, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OZARK ADULT PERSONAL CARE, LLC, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT LIBERTY MUTUAL, CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER FILED MARCH 3, 2026 A Hearing before Administrative Law Judge James D. Kennedy in Batesville, Arkansas, was...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:30:30.578Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H405925-2026-03-03","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/RITTER_ASHLEY_H405925_20260303.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}