Dollars, 031021 ARWC, G807714

• Case Date: March 10, 2021
• Court: Kansas

PENNEY LANE DOLLARS, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT PARAGOULD SCHOOL DISTRICT SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER RESPONDENT NO. 1 ARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, THIRD-PARTY ADMINISTRATOR RESPONDENT NO. 1 DEATH & PERMANENT TOTAL, DISABILITY TRUST FUND RESPONDENT NO. 2 WCC NO. G807714 Arkansas Workers Compensation Before the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission March 10, 2021          Hearing before Administrative Law Judge O. Milton Fine II on February 5, 2021, in Jonesboro, Craighead County, Arkansas.           Claimant represented by Ms. Whitney James, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.           Respondents No. 1 represented by Ms. Karen H. McKinney, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.           Respondent No. 2, represented by Ms. Christy L. King, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas, excused from participation.           Honorable O. Milton Fine II Chief Administrative Law Judge          STATEMENT OF THE CASE          On February 5, 2021, the above-captioned claim was heard in Jonesboro, Arkansas. A prehearing conference took place on December 16, 2020. A Prehearing Order entered that same day pursuant to the conference was admitted without objection as “Commission Exhibit 1.” At the hearing, the parties confirmed that the stipulations, issues, and respective contentions, as amended, were properly set forth in the Order.          Stipulations          The parties discussed the stipulations set forth in “Commission Exhibit 1.” After amendments at the hearing, they are the following, which I accept:

1. The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction over this claim.

2. The employee/self-insured employer/third-party administrator relationship existed on October 31, 2018.

3. Claimant’s average weekly wage of $348.00 entitles her to compensation rates of $232.00/$174.00.

         Issues          At the hearing, the parties discussed the issues set forth in “Commission Exhibit 1.” After amendments at the hearing, the following were litigated:

1. Whether the statute of limitations bars this claim.

2. Whether Claimant sustained a compensable injury to her lower back by specific incident.

3. Whether Claimant is entitled to reasonable and necessary medical treatment.

4. Whether Claimant is entitled to temporary total disability benefits from the day following the injury to a date yet to be determined.

5. Whether Claimant is entitled to a controverted attorney’s fee. All other issues have been reserved.

         Contentions          The respective contentions of the parties, following amendment at the hearing, are as follows:

Claimant:

1. On October 31, 2018, Claimant was in the course and scope of her employment as a teacher at Paragould Primary when she slipped on a student’s blanket and fell. The Respondents initially accepted the claim and paid some benefits, but eventually denied compensability and refused to provide any further benefits. The Claimant suffered injuries to her back in the fall; and she is still experiencing symptoms of the injury that she did not suffer prior to the work injury.

2. Claimant’s claim is not barred by the statute of limitations.

3. All other issues are reserved.

Respondents No. 1:

1. Respondents No. 1 contend that the statute of limitations has run, and that the Claimant is barred from receiving any benefits. The claimant has not filed a new Form AR-C since the order of dismissal was granted. Prior to controverting the claim, the last payment of benefits was on January 7, 2019. The date of injury is October 31, 2018. Accordingly, the statute of limitations ran on October 31, 2020, as this date is greater than one year from the last payment of benefits.

2. Alternatively, if the statute of limitations does not bar this claim, Respondents No. 1 contend that the Claimant did not sustain a compensable injury that is supported by

...