{
  "id": 5462448,
  "name": "AUTOMATED CONVEYOR SYSTEMS v. Calvin DOOLEY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Automated Conveyor Systems v. Dooley",
  "decision_date": "2004-12-16",
  "docket_number": "04-1256",
  "first_page": "218",
  "last_page": "219",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "360 Ark. 218"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "200 S.W.3d 442"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 156,
    "char_count": 1947,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.768,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.1995933875888662e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7668950514104925
    },
    "sha256": "2f4650222948eaab788e4b4fe7449e0f3154ce5f6720d5fd4fe3aa2a189f512e",
    "simhash": "1:0fbcb4d2205473b7",
    "word_count": 314
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:58:07.617704+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "AUTOMATED CONVEYOR SYSTEMS v. Calvin DOOLEY"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAutomated Conveyer Systems (Automated) petitions this court for a writ of prohibition alleging that the Crittenden County Circuit Court is without jurisdiction to hear this case because the exclusive remedy for an injury sustained in the course and scope of employment is provided under the Worker\u2019s Compensation Act. On January 21, 2004, Calvin Dooley filed a complaint based in negligence in the circuit court alleging that he suffered a gradual onset neck injury in the course and scope of employment. Dooley\u2019s employer Automated brought a motion to dismiss alleging that pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 ll-9-105(a)(Repl. 2002), Dooley had sought damages under the Worker\u2019s Compensation Act and was limited to that remedy. The circuit court denied the motion to dismiss, and Automated now seeks a writ of prohibition.\nThis petition for a writ of prohibition will be treated as a case. We order the parties to brief the following issues:\n1. Whether the Worker\u2019s Compensation Act remains the exclusive remedy for all non-intentional injuries arising out of the course and scope of employment;\n2. Whether amendments to Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 ll-9-704(c)(3) (Repl. 2002), which states that \u201cadministrative law judges, the commission, and any reviewing court shall construe the provisions of this chapter strictly,\u201d affect the analysis in this case;\n3. Whether the definition of \u201caccidental\u201d in Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 ll-9-102(4)(A)(Repl. 2002) excludes the injury in the present case from the Worker\u2019s Compensation Act; and\n4. Whether the injury in the present case is one that may be brought in negligence against Automated.\nThe appropriate briefing schedule will be established by the clerk of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Roberts Law Firm, P.A., by: John D. Webster, for petitioner.",
      "Fogleman & Rogers, by: Joe M. Rogers, for respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "AUTOMATED CONVEYOR SYSTEMS v. Calvin DOOLEY\n04-1256\n200 S.W.3d 442\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered December 16, 2004\nRoberts Law Firm, P.A., by: John D. Webster, for petitioner.\nFogleman & Rogers, by: Joe M. Rogers, for respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0218-01",
  "first_page_order": 240,
  "last_page_order": 241
}