{
  "id": 6136609,
  "name": "Jody HERNANDEZ v. SIMMONS INDUSTRIES and Allen Canning Company",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hernandez v. Simmons Industries",
  "decision_date": "1988-06-08",
  "docket_number": "CA 88-31",
  "first_page": "25",
  "last_page": "26",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "25 Ark. App. 25"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "752 S.W.2d 45"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark. Ct. App.",
    "id": 13370,
    "name": "Arkansas Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "23 Ark. App. 3",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        6135998
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark-app/23/0003-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "248 Ark. 1182",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1597777
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/248/1182-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 11-9-714",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "Ark. Code Ann.",
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 192,
    "char_count": 2440,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.871,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.912960672357197e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7319513608708461
    },
    "sha256": "5fb27c5b0d2ec0ac890ec466b44fcd39ae26ad1d8398f3db4f570dff32a83913",
    "simhash": "1:956a8ae767335ea2",
    "word_count": 399
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:49:05.220266+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jody HERNANDEZ v. SIMMONS INDUSTRIES and Allen Canning Company"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nJody Hernandez filed her motion in this court to remand this record to the Workers\u2019 Compensation Commission because the order appealed from is not a final one. We agree.\nPetitioner perfected an appeal to the Workers\u2019 Compensation Commission from an order of the administrative law judge denying her claim for benefits against Simmons Industries and Allen Canning Company. Allen Canning Company filed a motion before the Commission praying it be awarded costs against the appellant, as provided in Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 11-9-714 (1987) (formerly Ark. Stat. Ann. \u00a7 81-1330 (Repl. 1976)), because the claim against it had been asserted by Hernandez without reasonable grounds. The Commission denied the motion on a finding that reasonable grounds did exist. Allen Canning Company appeals from that ruling. No determination of the merits of Jody Hernandez\u2019 claim against either employer has been made by the Commission.\nFor an order to be appealable, it must be a final order. Ark. R. App. P. 2. To be final, an order must dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights as to the subject matter in controversy. This rule applies equally to appeals from the Workers\u2019 Compensation Commission. H. E. McConnell & Son v. Sadle, 248 Ark. 1182, 455 S.W.2d 880 (1970); Samuels Hide and Metal Co. v. Griffin, 23 Ark. App. 3, 739 S.W.2d 698 (1987). In Griffin, this court cited with approval the rule contained in 3 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen\u2019s Compensation \u00a7 80.11 (1983), which declares that interlocutory decisions and decisions on incidental matters are not reviewable for lack of finality, and that ordinarily an order of the Commission is reviewable only at the point where it awards or denies compensation. The Commission\u2019s order appealed from in this case concerned a purely incidental issue and did not dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights as to the subject matter in controversy. Therefore, it falls within the general rules as set out above and is not a final appealable order.\nThis appeal is dismissed without prejudice and the case remanded to the Workers\u2019 Compensation Commission for further proceedings.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Jay N. Tolley, for petitioner.",
      "No response filed for the respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jody HERNANDEZ v. SIMMONS INDUSTRIES and Allen Canning Company\nCA 88-31\n752 S.W.2d 45\nCourt of Appeals of Arkansas En Banc\nOpinion delivered June 8, 1988\nJay N. Tolley, for petitioner.\nNo response filed for the respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0025-01",
  "first_page_order": 51,
  "last_page_order": 52
}