Ezel / Agency Decisions / KENT 84-15-D

J. D. Mosley v. D. F. J. Coal Company, Inc. and John Linder (ALJ decision, December 23, 1983)

J. D. Mosley v. D. F. J. Coal Company, Inc. and John Linder (FMSHRC KENT 84-15-D): Discrimination case settled for $10,000 in lost wages

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
KENT 84-15-D
Decided
December 23, 1983
Presiding judge
Gary Melick
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-21
Cited standards
29 C.F.R. § 2700.11
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1983 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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1983
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.
Final ALJ decision under the Mine Act's 40-day rule
This administrative law judge decision became a final decision of the Commission because no Commissioner directed review within 40 days, under 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1). It is binding on the parties but is not Commission precedent. 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.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

J. D. Mosley brought a discrimination case against D. F. J. Coal Company and John Linder. At expedited hearings, Mosley asked to withdraw the complaint after reaching a settlement with the respondents. The agreement provided $10,000 in lost wages and additional promises from the operator that the order does not specify. Judge Gary Melick allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the case. The order does not decide whether discrimination occurred.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited rule: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.11, governing withdrawal of a pleading.
  • Outcome: Settlement followed by withdrawal and dismissal; $10,000 in lost wages and unspecified operator promises.
  • Key point: The judge dismissed the complaint after the complainant reported a satisfactory settlement.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
J.D. MOSLEY V. D.F.J. COAL
DDATE:
19831223
TTEXT:
~2223

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

J. D. MOSLEY,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
COMPLAINANT
Docket No. KENT 84-15-D v.
BARB CD 83-39
D. F. J. COAL COMPANY, INC.,
AND JOHN LINDER,
No. 4 Mine
RESPONDENT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Appearances: Tony Oppegard, Esq., Appalachian Research and Defense Fund of Kentucky, Hazard, Kentucky, for Complainant S.H.Johnson, Esq., Johnson & Johnson, Paintsville, Kentucky, for Respondents

Before: Judge Melick

At expedited hearings, the Complainant requested approval to withdraw his complaint in the captioned case based on a satisfactory settlement agreement between the parties. Under the agreement, the Complainant receives certain promises from the operator as well as payment of $10,000 for lost wages. Under the circumstances herein, permission to withdraw is granted. 29 CFR 2700.11. The case is therefore dismissed

Gary Melick
Assistant Chief Administrative Law Judge

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.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • 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