{"id":"full_commission-H206949-2025-03-05","awcc_number":"H206949","decision_date":"2025-03-05","opinion_type":"full_commission","claimant_name":"Glenda Lurry","employer_name":"Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc","title":"LURRY VS. COCA-COLA CONSOLIDATED, INC. AWCC# H206949 March 05, 2025","outcome":"denied","outcome_keywords":["denied:4"],"injury_keywords":["back"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Lurry_Glenda_H206949_20250305.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/full-commission-opinions/","filename":"Lurry_Glenda_H206949_20250305.pdf","text_length":7149,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \n \nCLAIM NO.  H206949 \n \nGLENDA LURRY, \nEMPLOYEE \n \nCLAIMANT \nCOCA-COLA CONSOLIDATED, INC.,  \nEMPLOYER \n \nRESPONDENT \nINDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF \nNORTH AMERICA, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA \nRESPONDENT \n  \n      \nOPINION FILED MARCH 5, 2025 \n \nUpon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, \nArkansas. \n \nClaimant is Pro Se. \n \nRespondents represented by the HONORABLE RICK BEHRING, JR., \nAttorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n  ORDER \nThe claimant has filed a “Motion for Reconsideration for Glenda \nLurry.”  The Full Commission denies the motion.  The parties stipulated that \nthe claimant “sustained a compensable injury to her lower back” on July 7, \n2022.  The parties stipulated that the respondents “accepted this claim as a \nmedical-only one and paid benefits pursuant thereto.”   \n A pre-hearing order was filed on August 28, 2023.  The claimant \ncontended that she was “entitled to additional benefits in connection with \nher stipulated compensable lower back injury.”  The respondents \ncontended, among other things, that they had “paid for all reasonable and \nnecessary medical treatment.”  The respondents contended that they were \nnot responsible for any temporary total disability benefits.   \n\nLURRY - H206949  2\n  \n \n \n After a hearing, an administrative law judge filed an opinion on \nJanuary 5, 2024.  The administrative law judge found that the claimant did \nnot prove she was entitled to additional treatment, and that the claimant did \nnot prove she was entitled to temporary total disability benefits.  The \nclaimant filed a timely notice of appeal to the Full Commission.   \n The Full Commission filed an opinion on September 19, 2024.  A \nmajority of the Full Commission affirmed and adopted the administrative law \njudge’s decision.  The Full Commission’s opinion was sent to the claimant \non September 19, 2024 by “CERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT \nREQUESTED.”  On October 11, 2024, the United States Postal Service \ndesignated the Certified Mail as “RETURN TO SENDER UNCLAIMED \nUNABLE TO FORWARD.”  The Certified Mail was marked “RECEIVED” by \nthe Commission on October 16, 2024.   \n Our file indicates that the claimant contacted the Commission’s Legal \nAdvisor Division on October 22, 2024.  A Legal Advisor noted on that date, \n“Expl the Comm. opinion and how to req’t appeal if she decides to pursue \nclaim further.”  The Legal Advisor further noted on October 29, 2024, \n“Discussed how to req’t appeal.  She said her neighbor had her opinion and \nbrought it to her.  Expl process and what has to be paid when going through \nprocess with ct of appeals.  She said she had new med. evid.  That was \n\nLURRY - H206949  3\n  \n \n \navail. at time of dec.  Expl not likely ct of appeals would allow but could ask \nfor it.”   \n Our file indicates that the claimant received the Full Commission’s \nSeptember 19, 2024 opinion no earlier than October 21, 2024.  The \nclaimant asserts that she received the Full Commission’s opinion from a \nneighbor on October 21, 2024.  The claimant’s “Motion for \nReconsideration,” received by the Commission on November 1, 2024, was \ntherefore timely filed in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-\n711(b)(1)(Repl. 2012).  The claimant seeks to introduce into evidence the \nrecord of an MRI scan performed at Regional One Health on July 15, 2024 \nin addition to accompanying correspondence dated July 19, 2024.  The \nfollowing are prerequisites by the Full Commission on proffer to present \nnewly-discovered evidence:  (1)  the newly discovered evidence must be \nrelevant; (2)  it must not be cumulative; (3)  it must change the result; and \n(4)  the party seeking to introduce the evidence must be diligent.  Quinn v. \nWebb Wheel, 52 Ark. App. 208, 915 S.W.2d 740 (1996), citing Haygood v. \nBelcher, 5 Ark. App. 127, 633 S.W.2d 391 (1982).   \n In the present matter, the Full Commission finds that the newly-\ndiscovered evidence proffered by the claimant is not relevant and would not \nchange the result of her case regarding the issues of additional medical \ntreatment and temporary total disability benefits.  We therefore deny the \n\nLURRY - H206949  4\n  \n \n \nclaimant’s “Motion for Reconsideration.”  The claimant to date has not \nindicated that she intends to appeal to the Arkansas Court of Appeals.  If \nthe claimant chooses to appeal to the Arkansas Court of Appeals, the \nappeal will be governed by Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-711(b)(Repl. 2012) and \nthe Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure – Civil.   \n IT IS SO ORDERED.   \n \n    ___________________________________ \n    SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Chairman \n \n    ___________________________________ \n    M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner \n \n \nCommissioner Mayton concurs in part and dissents in part. \n \nCONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION \n  I concur with the Majority’s findings that the claimant’s Motion for \nReconsideration should be denied since the newly discovered evidence \nproffered by the claimant is not relevant and would not change the result of \nher case regarding the issues of additional medical treatment and \ntemporary total disability benefits.  However, I dissent from the Majority’s \nopinion that the claimant’s Motion for Reconsideration was timely filed.    \nArk. R. Civ. P. 4(1) provides that: \n \nUpon timely filing in the circuit \ncourt of a motion for judgment \nnotwithstanding the verdict under \nRule 50(b) of the Arkansas Rules \n\nLURRY - H206949  5\n  \n \n \nof Civil Procedure, a motion to \namend the court's findings of fact \nor to make additional findings \nunder Rule 52(b), a motion for a \nnew trial under Rule 59(a), or any \nother motion to vacate, alter, or \namend the judgment made no later \nthan 10 days after entry of \njudgment, the time for filing a \nnotice of appeal shall be extended \nfor all parties. The notice of appeal \nshall be filed within thirty (30) days \nfrom entry of the order disposing of \nthe last motion outstanding. \nHowever, if the circuit court  \nneither grants nor denies the \nmotion within thirty (30) days of its \nfiling, the motion shall be deemed \ndenied by operation of law as of \nthe thirtieth day, and the notice of \nappeal shall be filed within thirty \n(30) days from that date. \n \nEven conceding to the Majority’s finding that the claimant received \nthe Full Commission’s Opinion on October 21, 2024, the claimant did not \nfile her Motion for Reconsideration with the Commission until November 1, \n2024, eleven (11) days after receiving the order, and should be denied \nsince it was not timely filed within ten (10) days.   \nThe Court of Appeals has ruled that Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 4(b)(1) \napplies to appeals from decisions of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation. \nPeco Foods, Inc. v. Johnson, 687 S.W.3d 840 (Ark. Ct. App. 2024). \n\nLURRY - H206949  6\n  \n \n \nSince the Motion for Consideration was not timely filed, the time for \nfiling a notice of appeal was not extended, and the claimant cannot now file \na notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals.  \nFor the reasons stated above, I concur, in part, and dissent, in part. \n \n    ___________________________________ \n    MICHAEL R. MAYTON, Commissioner","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H206949 GLENDA LURRY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT COCA-COLA CONSOLIDATED, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MARCH 5, 2025","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:29:44.452Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/full_commission-H206949-2025-03-05","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Lurry_Glenda_H206949_20250305.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/full-commission-opinions/"}}