Chaney Creek Coal Corporation (ALJ decision, August 14, 1987)

Plain-English summary

Odell Maggard alleged that Chaney Creek Coal Corporation forced him to quit after harassment following his reinstatement in an earlier discrimination matter. The parties settled before the scheduled hearing. Maggard agreed to withdraw the complaint and waive claims to reinstatement and attorney fees, while Chaney Creek agreed to pay him $7,000 in seven monthly installments. Judge George A. Koutras approved the settlement and ordered the respondent to comply, with dismissal to follow full performance.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
• Outcome: The settlement was approved, requiring $7,000 in installment payments, waiver of reinstatement and attorney-fee claims, and dismissal after full compliance.
• Key point: The judge approved the parties' agreed resolution of the discrimination complaint before the scheduled hearing.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
ODELL MAGGARD V. CHANEY CREEK
DDATE:
19870814
TTEXT:

Page 2

~1464

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

ODELL MAGGARD,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
COMPLAINANT
Docket No. KENT 87-138-D
v. MSHA Case No. BARB CD 86-72

CHANEY CREEK COAL CORPORATION,
Dollar Branch Mine
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Koutras

Statement of the Case

This proceeding concerns a complaint of discrimination filed by the complainant against the respondent pursuant to section 105(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The complainant alleged that after his reinstatement by the respondent as a result of a prior discrimination complaint, he was subsequently forced to quit his job because of harrassment by the respondent. A hearing on the merits of his complaint was scheduled for London, Kentucky, during September 1Ä3, 1987. However, the parties have now filed a joint motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that they have settled their dispute in accordance with a settlement agreement which they have filed.

Discussion

Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, Mr.
Maggard agrees to withdraw his complaint and to waive his claim to reinstatement and attorney fees in this matter. In return, the respondent agrees to pay Mr. Maggard the sum of $7,000 in damages. Said damages are to be paid in separate installments of
$1,000 each. The first installment shall be paid on or before July 22, 1987; and the remaining installments shall be paid on or before the 22nd of each succeeding month (with the final installment due on January 22, 1988).

Page 3

~1465
Conclusion

After careful review and consideration of the settlement terms and conditions executed by the parties in this proceeding, I conclude and find that it reflects a reasonable resolution of the complaint. Since it seems clear to me that the parties are in accord with the agreed-upon disposition of the complaint, I see no reason why it should not be approved.

ORDER

The proposed settlement IS APPROVED. Respondent IS ORDERED AND DIRECTED to fully comply forthwith with the terms of the agreement. Upon full and complete compliance with the terms of the agreement, this matter is dismissed.

George A. Koutras
Administrative Law Judge