Latoshia Blakley

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H304660 LATOSHIA S. BLAKLEY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT SHERWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER RESPONDENT ARKANSAS SCHOOL; BOARD ASSN., THIRD-PARTY ADMINISTRATOR RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JUNE 28, 2024 Hearing conducted on Wednesday, June 25, 2024, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Steven Porch, in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. The Claimant, Ms. Latoshia S. Blakley, pro se, of Conway, Arkansas, did not appear in person at the hearing. The Respondents were represented by the Honorable Carol L. Worley. However, the Motion to Dismiss was argued by her law partner, Melissa Wood, Little Rock, Arkansas. BACKGROUND This matter comes before the Commission on a Motion to Dismiss by Respondents. A hearing was conducted on June 25, 2024, in Little Rock, Arkansas. No testimony was taken in the case. Claimant, who according to Commission records is pro se, failed to appear at the hearing. The Claimant worked for the Respondent/Employer as a child nutrition director. The date for Claimant’s alleged injury was on October 7, 2022. She reported her injury to Respondent/Employer on the same day. Admitted into evidence was Respondents Exhibit 1, pleadings and correspondence, consisting of eleven pages. I have also blue-backed a certified returned receipt dated June 6, 2024, and Melanie Miller email dated May 22, 2024, as discussed infra.

BLAKLEY, AWCC No. H304660 2 The record reflects on July 25, 2023, a Form AR-C was filed with the Commission through Claimant purporting she injured herself when she was putting away cases of canned fruit she delivered to the school on October 7, 2022. On July 26, 2023, a Form AR-1 was filed in this case, reflecting that Claimant injured her right shoulder and bicep area. Respondents on July 26, 2023, filed a Form AR-2, along with a letter, accepting compensability. The Respondents’ counsel, Carol L. Worley, entered her appearance and filed a Motion to Dismiss on April 19, 2024, requesting this claim be dismissed for a lack of prosecution. The Claimant was sent, certified and regular U.S. Mail, notice of the Motion to Dismiss from my office on April 30, 2024, to her last known address. The certified notice was claimed by Claimant on May 3, 2024. The same notice was also sent regular U.S. Mail and did not return to the Commission. Claimant did not respond to the notice in writing as required. Thus, in accordance with applicable Arkansas law, the Claimant was mailed due and proper legal notice of Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss hearing date at her current address of record via the United States Postal Service (USPS), First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, and regular First- Class Mail, on May 22, 2024. The certified notice was returned to the Commission unclaimed on June 6, 2024, but the regular First-Class mail notice was not returned. The hearing took place on June 25, 2024. As mentioned before, the Claimant did not show up to the hearing. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the facts, issues, the applicable law, and the evidentiary record, I hereby make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The Commission has jurisdiction over this claim. 2. The Claimant and Respondents both had reasonable notice of the June 25, 2024, hearing.

BLAKLEY, AWCC No. H304660 3 3. Respondents have proven by the preponderance of the evidence that Claimant has failed to prosecute his claim under AWCC Rule 099.13. 4. The Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted. 5. This claim is hereby dismissed without prejudice. DISCUSSION Consistent with AWCC Rule 099.13, the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing, with proper notice, on the Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss. Though the hearing notice was unclaimed and returned to the Commission on June 6, 2024, the same notice was also sent to the Claimant’s address of record by First-Class U.S. Mail on May 22, 2024, and did not return to the Commission. The Claimant is responsible for providing the Commission with her current address. The Commission is responsible for providing reasonable notice of a hearing to the Claimant. Sending a hearing notice to the last known address that was provided to it by the Claimant is reasonable. Thus, I find by the preponderance of the evidence that reasonable notice was given to both parties. AWCC Rule 099.13 allows the Commission, upon meritorious application, to dismiss an action pending before it due to a want of prosecution. The Claimant filed her Form AR-C on July 25, 2023, and since then, Claimant has not made a demand for a hearing or has taken any other action in furtherance of the prosecution of this claim. In this regard, the Claimant has failed to do the bare minimum in prosecuting her claim. Therefore, I do find by the preponderance of the evidence that Claimant has failed to prosecute her claim by failing to request a hearing and moving her claim forward. Thus, Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss should be granted.

BLAKLEY, AWCC No. H304660 4 CONCLUSION Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth above, Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss is granted without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. ______________________________ Steven Porch Administrative Law Judge