Hicks v. Tezeno

11 SULLIVAN, Judge.

Frank Hicks appeals the dismissal of his workers’ compensation claim for failure to prosecute. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand.

Procedural History

On October 15, 2003, Mr. Hicks, through his attorney, Michael B. Miller, filed a disputed claim for compensation, alleging that he was injured on July 18, 2003, while working as a cement finisher for Gervis Tezeno. On November 11, 2003, Mr. Miller, on behalf of Mr. Hicks, attempted to participate by telephone in a mediation conference, but the conference was not held because Mr. Tezeno failed to appear. A second…