{"id":"alj-H506440-2026-04-27","awcc_number":"H506440","decision_date":"2026-04-27","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Carolyn Phillips","employer_name":"Great River Medical Ctr","title":"PHILLIPS VS. GREAT RIVER MEDICAL CTR. AWCC# H506440 April 27, 2026","outcome":"dismissed","outcome_keywords":["dismissed:11","granted:3"],"injury_keywords":["back","knee"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Phillips_Carolyn_H506440_20260427.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"Phillips_Carolyn_H506440_20260427.pdf","text_length":6417,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION \nWCC NO. H506440 \n \nCAROLYN L. PHILLIPS, \nEMPLOYEE                                                                                                              CLAIMANT \n \nGREAT RIVER MEDICAL CTR., \nEMPLOYER                                                                                                         RESPONDENT  \n \nBRIDGEFIELD EMPLOYERS INS. CO., \nCARRIER                                                                                                             RESPONDENT \n \nSUMMIT CONSULTING, LLC, \nTPA                                                                                                                        RESPONDENT   \n \n \nOPINION FILED APRIL 27, 2026 \n \nHearing conducted on Friday, March 27,  2026,  before  the  Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nCommission  (the  Commission),  Administrative  Law  Judge (ALJ) Steven  Porch,  in Jonesboro, \nCraighead County, Arkansas. \n \nThe Claimant was represented by Mr. Mark Alan Peoples, Little Rock, Arkansas.  \n \nThe Respondents  were represented by Mr. Guy  Alton  Wade,  Attorney  at  Law, Little  Rock, \nArkansas. \n \n \nI.  BACKGROUND \n This matter comes before the Commission on a Motion to Dismiss filed by Respondents \non January 12, 2026.  A hearing on the motion was conducted on March 27, 2026, in Jonesboro, \nArkansas.  Claimant failed to appear at the hearing. Claimant’s counsel waived his appearance for \nthis hearing. \nThe  Claimant  worked  for  the  Respondent/Employer  as a PBX  Operator.  The  date  for \nClaimant’s  alleged  injury  was  on June 4,   2024. This   incident   was   reported   to   the \nRespondent/Employer on the  same  day. Admitted  into  evidence  was Respondents’ Exhibit 1, \n\nPHILLIPS, AWCC No. H506440 \n \n2 \n \npleadings, consisting of 12 pages, and Commission Ex. 1, U.S. Mail return receipts, consisting of \n7 pages, as discussed infra. \nThe record reflects on October 7, 2025, a Form AR-C was filed by Claimant’s attorney, \nMark Alan Peoples, purporting that Claimant sustained an injury to her back, left knee, and left \nfoot. On October 16, 2025, a Form AR-1 was filed purporting that while Claimant was walking to \nthe time clock he tripped and fell on a crack in the middle of the floor. In a letter dated October \n16, 2025, Respondents accepted the claim as compensable.  \nOn  October  28,  2025,  a  joint  petition  was  filed  with  the  Commission. A  joint  petition \nhearing was set for December 12, 2025. On November 4, 2025, Claimant changed her mind and \nno  longer  wanted  to  settle  the  claim.  As  a  result,  the  hearing  was  cancelled,  and  the  file  was \nreturned to general files.  \nRespondents filed a motion to dismiss on January 12, 2026, for failure to prosecute. The \nClaimant was sent, on January 16, 2026, notice of the Motion to Dismiss, via certified and regular \nU.S. Mail, to her last known address. The certified motion notice was not claimed by Claimant as \nnoted by the return of the certified return receipt dated January 31, 2026. This notice was also sent \nregular  U.S.  Mail and did not return  to  the  Commission. The  Claimant  did not respond  to  the \nMotion, in writing, as required. However, Claimant’s counsel, in an email dated January 16, 2026, \nstated that he was not able to reach the Claimant but does not oppose a motion to dismiss without \nprejudice. Thus, in accordance with applicable Arkansas law, the Claimant was mailed due and \nproper legal notice of Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss hearing date at her current address of record \nvia the United States Postal Service (USPS), First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, \nand regular First-Class Mail, on February 24, 2026. The certified notice was claimed as noted by \nthe return receipt dated March 2, 2026. The hearing notice sent regular First-Class was not returned \n\nPHILLIPS, AWCC No. H506440 \n \n3 \n \nto the Commission. The hearing was scheduled for March 27, 2026. And as mentioned before, the \nClaimant did not show up to the hearing. \nII.  FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n After reviewing the record as a whole and other matters properly before the Commission, \nI hereby make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with Ark. Code \nAnn. § 11-9-704 (Repl. 2012):  \n1. The Commission has jurisdiction over this claim. \n \n2. The Claimant and Respondents both had reasonable notice of the March 27, 2026, \nhearing. \n \n3. Respondents have proven by the preponderance of the evidence that Claimant has \nfailed to prosecute her claim under 11 C.A.R. §25-110(d) (formerly AWCC Rule \n099.13).  \n \n4. The Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted. \n \n5. This claim is hereby dismissed without prejudice.     \n \n \nIII.  DISCUSSION \n 11 C.A.R. §25-110(d) provides: \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. \n \nSee generally Johnson v. Triple T Foods, 55 Ark. App. 83, 85, 929 S.W.2d 730 (1996).   \nConsistent  with 11  C.A.R. §25-110(d), the  Commission  scheduled  and  conducted  a \nhearing,  with  reasonable  notice, on  the Respondents’ Motion  to Dismiss. The  certified  hearing \n\nPHILLIPS, AWCC No. H506440 \n \n4 \n \nnotice  was claimed by  Claimant on  March  2,  2026. Thus,  I  find  by  the  preponderance  of  the \nevidence that the Claimant did receive reasonable notice of this motion to dismiss hearing.  \nFurthermore, 11 C.A.R. §25-110(d) allows the Commission, upon meritorious application, \nto dismiss an action pending before it due to  a want of prosecution. The  Claimant filed a Form \nAR-C on October 7, 2025.  Since then, the Claimant has not requested a bona fide full hearing, \nthus failing to prosecute her claim. Therefore, I do find by the preponderance of the evidence that \nClaimant  has  failed  to  prosecute  her claim. Thus, Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be \ngranted. \nCONCLUSION \n Based  on  the Findings  of Fact  and Conclusions  of Law set forth above, Respondents’ \nMotion to Dismiss is hereby granted, and Claimant’s claim is dismissed without prejudice. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n      ________________________________ \n      STEVEN PORCH \n      Administrative Law Judge","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H506440 CAROLYN L. PHILLIPS, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT GREAT RIVER MEDICAL CTR., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT BRIDGEFIELD EMPLOYERS INS. CO., CARRIER RESPONDENT SUMMIT CONSULTING, LLC, TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED APRIL 27, 2026 Hearing conducted on Friday, March 27, 2026, be...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:30:11.749Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H506440-2026-04-27","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Phillips_Carolyn_H506440_20260427.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}