E & T Trucking and Elmo Mayes
E & T Trucking and Elmo Mayes (FMSHRC KENT 85-41-D, KENT 85-42-D, and KENT 85-43-D): Discrimination complaints dismissed after settlement
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1985 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
James King, Kenneth Music, and John D. Music, Jr. brought discrimination complaints against E & T Trucking and Elmo Mayes. The parties reached a settlement during the hearings. Judge Gary Melick granted the complainants' request to withdraw their complaints under 29 C.F.R. § 2700.11. The three cases were dismissed.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.11
- Outcome: The complaints were withdrawn after settlement, and all three cases were dismissed.
- Key point: After the parties agreed to a settlement, the judge permitted withdrawal of the discrimination complaints and dismissed the cases.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
J. KING, K. MUSIC & J.D. MUSIC JR. v.
E & T TRUCKING & ELMO MAYES
DDATE:
19850822
TTEXT:
Page 2
~1291
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
Office of Administrative Law Judges
JAMES KING, DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDINGS
KENNETH MUSIC, AND,
JOHN D. MUSIC, JR., Docket No. KENT 85-41-D
COMPLAINANTS MSHA Case No. PIKE CD 84-13
v.
Docket No. KENT 85-42-D
E & T TRUCKING AND, MSHA Case No. PIKE CD 84-13
ELMO MAYES,
RESPONDENTS Docket No. KENT 85-43-D
MSHA Case No. PIKE CD 84-13
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Appearances: Stephen A. Sanders, Esq., Applachian Research
and Defense Fund of Kentucky, Inc.,
Prestonsburg, Kentucky and Tony Oppegard, Esq.,
Appalachian Research and Defense Fund of
Kentucky, Inc., Hazard, Kentucky for
Complainants;
Edward M. Dooley, Esq., Middlesboro, Kentucky;
for Respondents.
Before: Judge Melick
At hearings, the parties agreed upon a settlement and the
Complainants accordingly, request to withdraw their Complaints
herein. Under the circumstances permission to withdraw is
granted. 29 C.F.R. 2700.11. The cases are therefore dismissed.
Gary Melick
Administrative Law Judge
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1985, and it binds only those parties. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.