{"id":"alj-H406940-2025-10-21","awcc_number":"H406940","decision_date":"2025-10-21","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Jerome Gulley","employer_name":"Holcim","title":"GULLEY VS. HOLCIM AWCC# H406940 October 21, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:1","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/GULLEY_JEROME_H406940_20251021-1.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"GULLEY_JEROME_H406940_20251021-1.pdf","text_length":5935,"full_text":"1 \n \nBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H406940 \n \n \nJEROME GULLEY,  \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nHOLCIM,  \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n                                                                                     \nINDEMNITY INS. CO. OF NORTH AMERICA/ \nSEDGWICK CLAIMS MG’T SERVICES, INC., \nCARRIER/TPA                                                                                                    RESPONDENT                    \n                                                                                                                     \n \n \nOPINION FILED OCTOBER 21, 2025,  \nGRANTING RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE \n \nHearing conducted on Thursday, October 16, 2025, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission  (the  Commission),  Administrative  Law  Judge (ALJ)  Mike Pickens, in Hope, \nHempstead County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Mr. Jerome Gulley, pro se, of Prescott, Ouachita County, Arkansas, failed and/or \nrefused to appear at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable Michael Zachary Ryburn, Ryburn Law Firm, \nLittle Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.  \n \n \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n          A hearing was conducted on Thursday, October 16, 2025, to determine whether this claim \nshould be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a)(4) (2025 Lexis \nReplacement) and 11 C.A.R. Section 25-110(d) (Code of AR Regulations 2025) (formerly cited \nas Commission Rule 099.13 (2025 Lexis Replacement)). \n         The  claimant  initially  was represented  in  this  matter  by  attorney Andy  L.  Caldwell of the \nCaldwell Law  Firm  in  Little  Rock. In an email to the ALJ’s office Mr. Caldwell advised the \nclaimant  no  longer  wished  to  pursue  his  claim.  Consequently,  Mr.  Caldwell  requested  leave  to \n\nJerome Gulley, AWCC No. H406940 \n2 \n \nwithdraw as the claimant’s attorney. By ALJ order filed November 25, 2024, Mr. Caldwell was \ngranted leave to withdraw as the claimant’s attorney of record. (Commission  Exhibit 2). The \nrespondents filed a motion to dismiss this claim without prejudice for lack of prosecution (MTD) \non July 31, 2025. (Respondents’ Exhibit 1). In accordance  with the applicable law the claimant \nwas provided due and legal notice of both the respondents’ MTD as well as the date, time,  and \nplace of the subject hearing, which he received on August 27, 2025. (Comms’n Ex. 3). Thereafter, \nthe claimant failed and/or refused to respond to the respondents’ motion in any way, or to appear \nat the subject hearing. \n        The record herein consists of the hearing transcript and any and all exhibits contained therein \nand attached thereto. \n \nDISCUSSION \n        Consistent with Ark. Code Ann.§ 11-9-702(a)(4) (2025 Lexis Replacement), as well as our \ncourt of appeals’ ruling in Dillard vs. Benton County Sheriff’s Office,  87  Ark.  App.  379,  192 \nS.W.3d  287  (Ark.  App.  2004),  the  Commission  scheduled  and  conducted  a hearing  on the \nrespondents’ MTD. Rather  than  recite  a  detailed  analysis  of  the  record,  suffice  it  to  say  the \npreponderance of the evidence introduced at the hearing and contained in the record conclusively \nreveals the claimant has failed and/or refused to either actively prosecute his claim, or to request a \nhearing in the last six (6) months. All of this was consistent with his prior attorney’s email to the \nALJ advising he no longer wished to pursue his workers’ compensation claim. \n       Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the issues at bar, the applicable law as applied to \nthe facts of  this  claim,  and  other  relevant  matters  of  record including the representations and \nargument of credible counsel, I hereby make the following: \n\nJerome Gulley, AWCC No. H406940 \n3 \n \n \nFINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n \n1. The Commission has jurisdiction of this claim. \n \n2. After having received due and legal notice of both the respondents’ MTD without prejudice \nfiled with the Commission on July 22, 2025, as well as due and legal notice of the date, \ntime, and place of the subject hearing, the claimant failed and/or refused to respond to the \nMTD in any way and failed and/or refused to appear at the subject hearing. Moreover and \nsignificantly, the claimant’s prior attorney advised the ALJ by email that the claimant no \nlonger wished to pursue this claim. \n \n3. The claimant has not requested a hearing within the last six (6) months and has taken no \nsteps to raise any issues related to or to prosecute this claim.  \n \n4. Therefore, the preponderance of the evidence compels the decision the respondents’ MTD \nwithout prejudice filed July 31, 2025, should be and hereby is GRANTED; and this claim  \nis dismissed without prejudice to its refiling pursuant to the deadlines prescribed by Ark. \nCode  Ann. Section  11-9-702(a)  and  (b) and 11 C.A.R. 25-110(d)  (formerly  cited  as \nCommission Rule 099.13). \n \n        If they have not already done so, the respondents hereby are ordered to pay the court \nreporter’s invoice within twenty (20) days of their receipt thereof. \n        IT IS SO ORDERED. \n                                                                                             ____________________________                                                                                      \n                                                                                 Mike Pickens \n                                                                                             Administrative Law Judge \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nMP/mp \n \n                                                                                \n \n\nJerome Gulley, AWCC No. H406940 \n4","preview":"1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H406940 JEROME GULLEY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT HOLCIM, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT INDEMNITY INS. CO. OF NORTH AMERICA/ SEDGWICK CLAIMS MG’T SERVICES, INC., CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED OCTOBER 21, 2025, GRANTING RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:35:49.010Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H406940-2025-10-21","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/GULLEY_JEROME_H406940_20251021-1.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}