{"id":"alj-H500801-2025-12-18","awcc_number":"H500801","decision_date":"2025-12-18","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Jamie Reynolds","employer_name":"Tyson Poultry, Inc","title":"REYNOLDS VS. TYSON POULTRY, INC. AWCC# H500801 December 18, 2025","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:6"],"injury_keywords":[],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/REYNOLDS_JAMIE_H500801_20251218.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"REYNOLDS_JAMIE_H500801_20251218.pdf","text_length":2325,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \n WCC NO. H500801 \n \nJAMIE REYNOLDS, Employee CLAIMANT \n \nTYSON POULTRY, INC. Employer RESPONDENT \n \nTYSON FOODS, INC. Carrier RESPONDENT \n \n \n \n OPINION FILED DECEMBER 18, 2025 \n \nHearing   before   ADMINISTRATIVE   LAW   JUDGE GREGORY   K.   STEWART in \nRussellville, Pope County, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant not represented by counsel and not appearing at hearing. \n \nRespondents  represented  by J.  MATTHEW  MAULDIN,  Attorney  at  Law, Little  Rock, \nArkansas. \n \n \n STATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n This case comes on for review following a hearing on respondent’s Motion to \nDismiss. \n On  February  7,  2025,  claimant  filed an AR-C  requesting  various  compensation \nbenefits. She also filed a request to change physicians to Dr. Kelly. On March 3, 2025, a \nChange of Physician Order  was  entered  allowing  claimant to  change  physicians to  Dr. \nKelly.  Claimant  underwent  an  evaluation  by  Dr.  Kelly  on  March  17,  2025,  and  he \nreleased her from his care on March 24, 2025. \n Since her release by Dr. Kelly, claimant has taken no further action to prosecute \nher claim. As a result, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss on September 30, 2025. In a \nletter  dated  October  8,  2025,  this  administrative  law  judge  asked  claimant  to  state \n\nReynolds H500801 \n \n-2- \nwhether  she  objected  to  the  respondent’s  Motion  to  Dismiss.  No  response  was \nforthcoming  and  as  result  a  hearing  was  scheduled on the  respondent’s motion for \nDecember 8, 2025. Notice of the hearing was sent to claimant by certified mail and was \ndelivered  on  November  7,  2025.  Claimant  did  not  appear  at  the  hearing  and  has  not \nresponded to the respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.  \n Pursuant  to  11  CAR §25-110(d) (previously  codified  as  Commission  Rule \n099.13), the Commission may enter an order dismissing a claim for want of prosecution. \nAfter my review of the respondent’s motion, the claimant’s failure to respond thereto or \nappear at the hearing, and all other matters properly before the Commission, I find that \nclaimant  has  failed  to  prosecute her claim.  Therefore, her  claim  is  dismissed  without \nprejudice. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n      _______________________________ \n      GREGORY K. STEWART \n      ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H500801 JAMIE REYNOLDS, Employee CLAIMANT TYSON POULTRY, INC. Employer RESPONDENT TYSON FOODS, INC. Carrier RESPONDENT OPINION FILED DECEMBER 18, 2025 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE GREGORY K. STEWART in Russellville, Pope County, Arkansas. Claimant ...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:33:55.683Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H500801-2025-12-18","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/REYNOLDS_JAMIE_H500801_20251218.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}