Graves v. Hopper ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                 Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 631
    ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION II
    No. CV-17-254
    LUTHER F. GRAVES AND                            Opinion Delivered:   November 15, 2017
    FIRSTCOMP INSURANCE
    COMPANY                                         APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
    APPELLANTS                   WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
    COMMISSION
    V.                                              [No. G306961]
    TIMOTHY W. HOPPER                         SUPPLEMENTATION OF THE
    APPELLEE RECORD AND SUPPLEMENTATION
    OF THE ADDENDUM ORDERED
    WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge
    Appellants Luther F. Graves and Firstcomp Insurance Company (collectively
    “Graves”) appeal from the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission’s (Commission)
    January 13, 2017 opinion affirming and adopting the administrative law judge’s June 7, 2016
    opinion in favor of appellee. On appeal, Graves argues that (1) appellee’s claim is time-
    barred by Arkansas Code Annotated section 11-9-702(a); and (2) the Commission erred in
    finding that he is estopped from asserting the statute of limitations defense because appellee
    had actual notice of the existence of a workers’ compensation policy. We are unable to
    address the merits of appellants’ argument and order supplementation of the record and
    supplementation of the addendum.
    On August 26, 2013, appellee fell from a ladder and was injured while working on
    a construction crew assembled by Graves. Appellee initially filed a complaint against Ray
    Dawson, Jr., and Dixie Planting Company (Dixie). Dawson owns Dixie. The Phillips
    County Circuit Court remanded the claim to the Commission for a determination of the
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 631
    employment relationship between Dixie and appellee. The complaint does not appear in
    the record or the addendum and neither does the order.
    Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 3-3 requires that the record include the complaint
    and subsequent orders should appear in the record in chronological order. Arkansas Rule of
    Appellate Procedure—Civil 6(e) states that if anything material to either party is omitted
    from the record by error or accident, the appellate court, on its own initiative, may direct
    that the omission or misstatement shall be corrected, and if necessary, that a supplemental
    record be certified and transmitted.
    Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2 states that “[t]he addendum shall contain true and
    legible copies of the non-transcript documents in the record on appeal that are essential for
    the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues
    on appeal.” Because the matter began in circuit court and was remanded to the Commission,
    rather than by a claim filed with an employer as is typical in these matters—no claim against
    Graves, via any form or letter, was filed by appellee in this matter and Graves was made a
    party to an already-existing claim against Dixie 1—this court needs not only the complaint
    which began this matter, but also the order that remanded the matter to the Commission.
    While the ALJ’s June 7, 2016 opinion dismissed Dawson and Dixie, we have nothing
    showing how they came to be a party to begin with. Furthermore, this court also notes that
    the record and addendum are both missing Dixie’s motion to the Commission to have
    Graves joined to the matter as a party, pursuant to which the ALJ noted he was joining
    1
    Appellee first noticed a direct claim against Graves in his August 26, 2015 complaint
    filed in Phillips County Circuit Court. However, there is a factual issue as to whether Graves
    knew appellee had a claim against him as his employee.
    2
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 631
    Graves as a party in its November 9, 2015 order; and a motion to dismiss from Graves in
    Phillips County Circuit Court, to which appellee responded October 13, 2015. The dates
    of all these documents are important as both issues on appeal—notice and statute of
    limitations—are fact-dependent. Because none of these documents appear in the record or
    addendum, we find both the record and the addendum to be deficient so that we cannot
    reach the merits of the case.
    Accordingly, we remand for supplementation of the record, correcting the above-
    referenced deficiencies within thirty days. Additionally, we order appellant to submit a
    supplemental addendum correcting the above-referenced deficiencies within fifteen days
    from the date on which the supplemental record is filed. We encourage appellant’s counsel
    to review Rules 3-3 and 4-2 of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of
    Appeals to ensure that the supplemental record and supplemental addendum comply with
    the rules and that no additional deficiencies are present.
    Supplementation of the record and supplementation of the addendum ordered.
    ABRAMSON and MURPHY, JJ., agree.
    Worley, Wood & Parrish, P.A., by: Jarrod S. Parrish, for appellants.
    David A. Hodges, for appellee.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CV-17-254

Judges: Waymond M. Brown

Filed Date: 11/15/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/15/2017