Ezel / Agency Decisions / kent-83-38-d-commission
FMSHRC Commission decision Docket KENT 83-38-D Decided August 30, 1985 Procedural Transcribed from scan

Secretary of Labor o/b/o Eperson v. Jolene, Inc., aka Joline, Inc.

Secretary of Labor o/b/o Eperson v. Jolene, Inc., aka Joline, Inc. (FMSHRC KENT 83-38-D): Motion to reopen denied

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 1985, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1985
The MSHA standards may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Commission or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. The full text below is from the official FMSHRC release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official FMSHRC release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Transcribed from a scanned original: FMSHRC released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Joline, Inc. asked the Commission to reopen the record in a discrimination case involving Shelby Eperson. The request followed a Sixth Circuit order enforcing the Commission's earlier order granting Eperson reinstatement, back pay, interest, and expenses. The Commission held that its jurisdiction had ended because the Sixth Circuit had exclusive jurisdiction under section 106(a)(1) of the Mine Act. It denied both the motion to reopen and the respondent's request for additional time to reply.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 816(a)(1).
  • Outcome: The motion to reopen the record and the motion for additional reply time were denied.
  • Key point: After a court of appeals obtains exclusive jurisdiction over enforcement of a Commission order, the Commission will not reopen the record.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
MSHA V. JOLENE
DDATE:
19850830
TTEXT:

              FMSHRC-WDC
              AUG 30, 1985

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
on behalf of SHELBY EPERSON
v. Docket No. KENT 83-38-D

JOLENE, INC., aka JOLINE, INC.

               ORDER

Upon consideration of the motion of Joline, Inc., to reopen
the record in this case and of the Secretary's response thereto,
we deny the motion. Joline's motion directly follows the January 25,
1985 Order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit, enforcing the Commission's order granting Shelby Eperson
reinstatement, back pay, interest and expenses. Donovan v. Joline,
Inc., No. 84-3358 (unpublished).

The Secretary's response to the motion states inter alia "The

jurisdiction of the Commission at this point in the proceeding has
ceased." Response at 4. We agree. Under Section 106(a)(1) of the
Mine Act, the Sixth Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over this
matter. Accordingly, respondent's motion to reopen is denied.

For the foregoing reasons we also deny respondent's motion for
time in which to reply to petitioner's response filed August 29, 1985.

              Richard V. Backley, Acting Chairman


              James A. Lastowka, Commissioner


              L. Clair Nelson, Commissioner

Page 2

~1160
Distribution

Robert J. Greene, Esq.
P.O. Box 432
Betsy Layne, Kentucky 41605

Barry F. Wisor, Esq.
Office of the Solicitor
U.S. Department of Labor
4015 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, Virginia 22203

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 1985. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.