Cullor Rock Quarry (ALJ decision, October 28, 1992)
Cullor Rock Quarry (FMSHRC CENT 92-228-CM): Compensation complaint dismissed by default
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1992 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent say, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Bill Burris filed a compensation complaint against Cullor Rock Quarry. After he did not respond to repeated requests to confirm that he wished to proceed, Judge Jerold Feldman ordered him to show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed. Burris did not respond. The judge entered default judgment for the respondent and dismissed the compensation complaint with prejudice. The scheduled hearing was canceled.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standards: None identified in the official released text.
- Outcome: Default judgment was entered for Cullor Rock Quarry, and the compensation complaint was dismissed with prejudice.
- Key point: Failing to respond to the judge's requests and show-cause order resulted in dismissal by default.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
BILL BURRIS V. CULLOR ROCK QUARRY
DDATE:
19921028
TTEXT:
Page 2
~1747
BILL BURRIS,
: COMPENSATION PROCEEDING
Complainant :
v. : Docket No. CENT 92-228-CM
:
CULLOR ROCK QUARRY, : Mine No. 23-01924 Respondent :
ORDER Of DEFAULT
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Before: Judge Feldman
A hearing in the captioned matter was scheduled for November 5, 1992, in Joplin, Missouri. During the course of a September 17, 1992, telephone conversation with Mr. Tim Ragland, a co-complainant in this matter who has withdrawn his complaint for compensation, I was advised that Mr. Burris may no longer be interested in pursuing his complaint. Mr. Ragland also informed me that Mr. Burris did not have a telephone. In a letter dated October 1, 1992, I requested Mr. Burris to contact my office within ten days to inform me whether he still wished to proceed. I indicated that his failure to timely respond would be construed as an indication that he was no longer interested in prosecuting his compensation case.
Having failed to reply to my October 1, 1992, request, on October 13, 1992, I ordered Mr. Burris to show cause (explain why) in writing on or before October 19, 1992, why a default decision should not be issued dismissing with prejudice his complaint for compensation. The order was delivered via express mail.
Despite my repeated requests, the Mr. Burris has failed to convey that he is interested in prosecuting his complaint. ACCORDINGLY, judgement by default is hereby entered in favor of the respondent and the compensation complaint filed by Mr. Burris is DISMISSED with prejudice. Consequently, the hearing in this matter is canceled.
Jerold Feldman
Administrative Law Judge
(703) 756-5233
Page 3
~1748
Distribution:
Mr. Bill Burris, 1002 E. Berry Nevada, MO 64772 (Certified Mail)
Mr. Bill Burris, 2123 W. Austin, Nevada, Missouri 64772 (Certified Mail) (Old Address)
Cullor, Incorporated, 20th and Sidney, Ft. Scott, Kansas 66701 (Certified Mail)
/vmy
What applies to your situation today?
This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent against your facts, with citations.
Try Ezel Pro free for 7 days. Cancel anytime before the trial ends and you pay nothing.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace