BROWN v. KENT-CHEVROLET-OLDSMOBILE CADILLAC, 1999 AWCC 164


CLAIM NO. E805505

WILLIAM D. BROWN, EMPLOYEE, CLAIMANT v. KENT-CHEVROLET-OLDSMOBILE CADILLAC, EMPLOYER, RESPONDENT and RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR, RESPONDENT

Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
ORDER FILED MAY 28, 1999

Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.

Claimant represented by FREDERICK S. “RICK” SPENCER, Attorney at Law, Mountain Home, Arkansas.

Respondent represented by WALTER A. MURRAY, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.

[1] ORDER
[2] This matter is presently before the Commission on Respondent’s Motion to Correct and/or Clarify the Record regarding the Commission’s exhibits. After reviewing respondent’s motion, claimant’s response stating he has no objection thereto, and all other matters properly before the Commission, we find that respondent’s motion is well taken and should be granted.

[3] At the hearing held on October 21, 1998, the Commission entered into evidence a Pre-Hearing Order filed September 1, 1998, which was marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. 1, and an Order entered October 20, 1998, denying claimant’s request for a continuance which was marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. 2. Subsequent to the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge entered into evidence claimant’s letter/motion for a continuance dated October 20, 1998, and claimant’s letter/motion for Voluntary Dismissal of Claim Without Prejudice dated October 20, 1998. The two exhibits made part of the record subsequent to the full hearing were not marked and numerically identified. Accordingly, it is our opinion that for the purpose of clarity and identification, claimant’s letter/motion for continuance dated October 20, 1998, be marked and identified as Commission Exhibit No. 3, and claimant’s letter/motion for Voluntary Dismissal of Claim Without Prejudice dated October 20, 1998, be marked and identified as Commission Exhibit No. 4.

[4] Accordingly, for those reasons set forth herein, we find that respondent’s motion to correct or clarify the record should be, and hereby is, granted.

[5] IT IS SO ORDERED. _______________________________
ELDON F. COFFMAN, Chairman _______________________________ PAT WEST HUMPHREY, Commissioner _______________________________ MIKE WILSON, Commissioner