Watson v. Black

E.D. Arkansas

Watson v. Black

DecidedAugust 24, 2022

Docket4:22-cv-00628

StatusUnknown

This text of Watson v. Black (Watson v. Black) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Watson v. Black, (E.D. Ark. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

CARL OBADIAH WATSON PLAINTIFF

V. No. 4:22-cv-628-DPM

CHANDRA L. BLACK, Administrative Law Judge; SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Commission Chairman; CHRISTOPHER L. PALMER, Commissioner; M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner; ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION; ARKANSAS DEATH AND PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY TRUST FUND; STATE OF ARKANSAS DEFENDANTS

ORDER 1. Watson's application to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 1, is granted. He reports living on disability income. 2. The Court must screen Watson’s complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Watson had a bad fall at work. He pursued a claim for workers’ compensation benefits through the administrative process and judicial review. His claim did not succeed. Watson v. Highland Pellets, LLC, 2022 Ark. App. 132, 643 S.W.3d 267.

Watson’s later suit here fails. Having lost in state court, he cannot challenge that decision and pursue workers’ compensation benefits in federal court. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 284 (2005); see also Skinner v. Switzer, 562 U.S. 521, 531-32 (2011). Arkansas and the workers’ compensation commission are immune from suit. Will v. Michigan Department of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989). Administrative Law Judge Black and Commissioners Douthit, Palmer, and Willhite are also immune from suit because they acted in a judicial capacity on issues within their jurisdiction. Justice Network Inc. v. Craighead County, 931 F.3d 753, 759-64 (8th Cir. 2019); see also, e.g., VanHorn v. Oelschlager, 457 F.3d 844, 847-48 (8th Cir. 2006). The Court will dismiss the case without prejudice. So Ordered. _ J D.P. Marshall Jr! United States District Judge AY Avqust 2b A>

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

CARL OBADIAH WATSON PLAINTIFF

V. No. 4:22-cv-628-DPM

CHANDRA L. BLACK, Administrative Law Judge; SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Commission Chairman; CHRISTOPHER L. PALMER, Commissioner; M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner; ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION; ARKANSAS DEATH AND PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY TRUST FUND; STATE OF ARKANSAS DEFENDANTS

ORDER 1. Watson's application to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 1, is granted. He reports living on disability income. 2. The Court must screen Watson’s complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Watson had a bad fall at work. He pursued a claim for workers’ compensation benefits through the administrative process and judicial review. His claim did not succeed. Watson v. Highland Pellets, LLC, 2022 Ark. App. 132, 643 S.W.3d 267.

Watson’s later suit here fails. Having lost in state court, he cannot challenge that decision and pursue workers’ compensation benefits in federal court. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 284 (2005); see also Skinner v. Switzer, 562 U.S. 521, 531-32 (2011). Arkansas and the workers’ compensation commission are immune from suit. Will v. Michigan Department of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989). Administrative Law Judge Black and Commissioners Douthit, Palmer, and Willhite are also immune from suit because they acted in a judicial capacity on issues within their jurisdiction. Justice Network Inc. v. Craighead County, 931 F.3d 753, 759-64 (8th Cir. 2019); see also, e.g., VanHorn v. Oelschlager, 457 F.3d 844, 847-48 (8th Cir. 2006). The Court will dismiss the case without prejudice. So Ordered. _ J D.P. Marshall Jr! United States District Judge AY Avqust 2b A>

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Watson v. Black, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-black-ared-2022.

Opinion

V. No. 4:22-cv-628-DPM

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack