CLAIM NO. E215931
DOROTHY GRAYBILL, EMPLOYEE, CLAIMANT, v. HARVEST FOODS, INC., EMPLOYER, RESPONDENT, and ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE CO., INSURANCE CARRIER, RESPONDENT
Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 7, 1994
Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Claimant represented by the HONORABLE JOHN L. BURNETT, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Respondents represented by the HONORABLE RANDY P. MURPHY, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Remanded.
[1] OPINION AND ORDER
[2] The claimant appeals an opinion and order filed by the administrative law judge on June 21, 1994. In that opinion and order, the administrative law judge found that the claimant’s attorney is not entitled to an attorney’s fee on any benefits paid following the acceptance of the claim as compensable by respondents.
[3] After reviewing this matter, we find that the claim must be remanded to the administrative law judge so that the record can be settled. In his June 21, 1994, opinion and order, the administrative law judge states that “[t]there is insufficient evidence to support a finding that respondents controverted the claim for benefits after it was accepted as compensable following the examination by Dr. Michael Moore.” In addition, the administrative law judge states that his findings are based on “a careful review of the entire record,” and he makes multiple references to “the evidence.” Moreover, the administrative law judge discusses the facts of the claim in some detail. However, we are unable to ascertain where any record was ever compiled in this matter. Therefore, we find that the claim must be remanded so that the record upon which the administrative law judge’s decision is based can be identified.
[4] Whenever a party applies for review by the Full Commission of an administrative law judge’s determination, we must conduct a de novo review of the entire record of evidence received by the administrative law judge. Woods v.Best Western,
32 Ark. App. 196,
799 S.W.2d 565 (1990). In addition, we have a statutory duty to make our determination on the basis of the record as a whole. Ark. Code Ann. §
11-9-704 (c)(2) (Supp. 1993). Obviously, we cannot properly perform our duty to review the entire record unless all of the evidence comprising the record compiled which is readily discernable with certainty.
[5] Accordingly, for the reasons discussed herein, we find that this claim must be remanded to the administrative law judge with instructions to properly identify the record.
[6] IT IS SO ORDERED.
JAMES W. DANIEL, Chairman ALLYN C. TATUM, Commissioner
[7] Commissioner Humphrey did not participate.
