White County Judge and Association of Arkansas Counties Risk Management Services v. Bruce Menser, 597 S.W.3d 640

On December 16, 2013, White County deputy Bruce Menser experienced acute symptoms (headache, shortness of breath) after smelling rotten-egg odor in his patrol car; he was treated for possible carbon-monoxide exposure/chemical pneumonitis. A recently installed battery in his trunk showed scorch marks and leakage.
The employer/insurer filed AR-1 and AR-2 on December 20, 2013 and initially listed the claim as accepted; the carrier paid medical and indemnity benefits totaling about $25,136.45, with the last indemnity payment on April 21, 2014.
Menser never filed a formal Form AR-C for additional compensation. His counsel sent a July 11, 2014 letter asking to set a hearing on medical benefits and TTD (reserving PTD). The ALJ issued a September 15, 2014 prehearing order listing compensability and medical benefits among the issues; the matter was continued and the file returned to the Commission’s general files.
Counsel renewed the hearing request in December 2016; an ALJ hearing was set for April 2017. The ALJ (and later the Commission) found the statute of limitations tolled by counsel’s filings/prehearing order and awarded compensable brain and neuropathy injuries.
The court of appeals affirmed; the Arkansas Supreme Court granted review and reversed, holding the additional-benefits claim was time-barred under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702 because neither a Form AR-C nor a document specifically requesting additional compensation was filed within the statutory period.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Menser timely filed a claim for additional compensation under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702 (tolling and sufficiency of filings)	Menser (via counsel) argued the July 11, 2014 letter and/or the ALJ’s Sept. 15, 2014 prehearing order sufficiently constituted a timely claim for additional benefits and tolled the limitations period	Appellants argued Menser never filed a Form AR-C or any document that "specifically state[d]" it was a claim for additional compensation as required by § 11-9-702(c), so the claim is barred	Reversed: under strict construction of § 11-9-702(b)(1) and (c), Menser’s claim was time-barred; the prehearing order (and counsel’s letter) did not satisfy the statute’s requirement that a claim "specifically state" it is for additional compensation
Whether Menser suffered compensable brain and neuropathy injuries	Menser contended his post-exposure neurological symptoms were compensable consequences of the workplace exposure	Appellants contested causation and sufficiency of evidence for those diagnoses	Not reached on merits—Supreme Court resolved the case on statute-of-limitations grounds and declined to address substantial-evidence arguments

Frances v. Gaylord Container Corp., 341 Ark. 527, 20 S.W.3d 280 (deference to Commission; substantial-evidence standard)
Miller v. Enders, 2013 Ark. 23, 425 S.W.3d 723 (statutory-interpretation de novo)
Sykes v. Williams, 373 Ark. 236, 283 S.W.3d 209 (workers’ compensation statutes strictly construed)
Hapney v. Rheem Mfg. Co., 341 Ark. 548, 26 S.W.3d 771 (plain-meaning application of statutes)
Farris v. Express Servs., Inc., 2019 Ark. 141, 572 S.W.3d 863 (strict application of § 11-9-702; late filing barred)
Stewart v. Ark. Glass Container, 2010 Ark. 198, 366 S.W.3d 358 (claimant bears burden to prove timely filing)
Cedar Chem. Co. v. Knight, 372 Ark. 233, 273 S.W.3d 473 (procedural posture when this Court grants review)
Dillard v. Benton County Sheriff's Office, 87 Ark. App. 379, 192 S.W.3d 287 (contrasted factually on whether defective AR-C sufficed to preserve claim)
Stoltz v. Friday, 325 Ark. 399, 926 S.W.2d 438 (issue-preservation and when merits need not be addressed due to limitations)