WEBB v. WEBB, 2011 AWCC 103

CLAIM NO. F907467

RONALD G. WEBB, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT v. BILLY WEBB, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT EMC INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER RESPONDENT

Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
ORDER FILED AUGUST 8, 2011

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

Claimant represented by the HONORABLE LAURA BETH YORK, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.

Respondent represented by the HONORABLE MELISSA WOOD, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.

ORDER
The respondents in the above-styled matter move the Full Commission to reconsider our June 27, 2011 Order which denied the respondents’ motion to allow filing of a belated brief. The Full Commission denies the respondents’ motion for reconsideration.

The respondents’ brief was due on June 3, 2011. The respondents did not file a brief until June 8, 2011.

Page 2

Because the respondents’ motion to file a belated brief was not timely filed, the Full Commission finds that the motion must be denied. See Petty v. Telling Industries, Inc., Workers’ Compensation Commission F812228 (Dec.7, 2009); Garth v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc., Workers’ Compensation Commission F803409 (Dec. 17, 2009); Hickey v. Gardisser Constr., Workers’ Compensation Commission F609988 F612976 (Jan. 13, 2009).

The Full Commission denies the respondents’ motion for reconsideration. We once again instruct the Clerk of the Commission to place this matter on our submission docket for appropriate adjudication.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

________________________________ A. WATSON BELL, Chairman

________________________________ PHILIP A. HOOD, Commissioner

Commissioner McKinney dissents.

DISSENTING OPINION
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s Order denying the respondents’ Motion for Reconsideration. In my opinion, the Motion should be granted.

Page 3

The respondents’ original brief to the Full Commission was due on June 3, 2011. Due to an administrative error, the respondents’ brief was not filed until June 6, 2011. Two attempts were made to fax the brief on June 3rd at 15:57 and the other attempt was made at 16:23. The respondents’ counsel’s office was not aware that the second attempt had also failed. Therefore, the third attempt was made on June 6th. The third attempt on June 6th was the one that actually went through to the Clerk’s office. Due to the late filing of the brief, the respondents filed a Motion to File a Belated Brief on June 18, 2011. By an Order dated June 27, 2011, the Full Commission denied the respondents’ motion to file the belated brief. On July 7, 2011, the respondents filed the Motion for Reconsideration.

The respondents cited the case of Jackson v. Pulaski CountySchool District, Full Commission Opinion filed October 13, 2011, Claim No. F704526, as being analogous to the facts in this case. I agree that the Jackson case is analogous to the situation presently before us. Accordingly, the respondents’ Motion for Reconsideration should be granted. Therefore, I must

Page 4

respectfully dissent from the majority’s denial of the respondents’ Motion for Reconsideration.

Page 1