{"id":"alj-H407634-2025-08-22","awcc_number":"H407634","decision_date":"2025-08-22","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Casey Church","employer_name":"Tyson Poultry, Inc","title":"CHURCH VS. TYSON POULTRY, INC. AWCC# H407634 August 22, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:1","granted:1"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/CHURCH_CASEY_H407634_20250822.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"CHURCH_CASEY_H407634_20250822.pdf","text_length":5395,"full_text":"1 \n \nBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nCLAIM NO. H407634 \n \n \nCASEY L. CHURCH, \nEMPLOYEE CLAIMANT \n \nTYSON POULTRY, INC., \nEMPLOYER RESPONDENT \n \nTYSON POULTRY, INC./ \nTYNET CORP. \nCARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT \n \n \n \nOPINION FILED AUGUST 22, 2025, \nGRANTING RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE \n \n \nHearing conducted on Thursday, August 21, 2025, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Arkadelphia, \nClark County, Arkansas. \n \nThe claimant, Ms. Casey L. Church, pro se, failed and/or refused to appear at the hearing. \n \nThe respondents were represented by the Honorable Melissa Wood, Worley, Wood & Parrish, \nP.A., Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. \n \n \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n A hearing was conducted on Thursday, August 21, 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)). The claimant herein was initially \nrepresented by counsel, the Honorable Gregory L. Giles of Texarkana, Arkansas. By order filed \nMay 29, 2025, the Full Commission granted Mr. Giles’s letter motion to be relieved as the \nclaimant’s attorney of record. (Respondents’ Exhibit 1 at 5). \n\nCasey L. Church, AWCC No. H407634 \n2 \n \n The respondents filed a motion to dismiss this claim without prejudice for lack of prosecution \n(MTD) on June 9, 2025. (RX1 at 6-8). In accordance with the applicable law the claimant was \nprovided due and legal notice of both the respondents’ MTD as well as the date, time, and place \nof the subject hearing, which she received on June 20, 2025. (Commission Exhibit 1). 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. \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 her claim or to request a \nhearing in the last six (6) months. \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 of credible \ncounsel, I hereby make the following: \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 June 9, 2025, as well as due and legal notice of the date, \n\nCasey L. Church, AWCC No. H407634 \n3 \n \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. \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 June 9, 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 \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nMP/mp \n \n \n \n\nCasey L. Church, AWCC No. H407634 \n4","preview":"1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H407634 CASEY L. CHURCH, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT TYSON POULTRY, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT TYSON POULTRY, INC./ TYNET CORP. CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED AUGUST 22, 2025, GRANTING RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:37:54.119Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H407634-2025-08-22","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/CHURCH_CASEY_H407634_20250822.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}