Adena Fuels, Incorporated (ALJ decision, December 29, 1994)

Adena Fuels, Incorporated (FMSHRC KENT 94-57-D): Discrimination case dismissed after settlement

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
KENT 94-57-D
Decided
December 29, 1994
Presiding judge
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-13

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1994 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 1994
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, not Commission precedent
This decision became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds 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

Larry E. Hatton brought a discrimination proceeding against Adena Fuels concerning the Diamond No. 1 Mine. After the hearing began and was postponed, Hatton requested permission to withdraw because the parties had reached an agreeable settlement. Judge Gary Melick granted permission to withdraw under 29 C.F.R. § 2700.11, canceled the scheduled continuation of the hearing, and dismissed the case.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c) and 29 C.F.R. § 2700.11
  • Outcome: Withdrawal was permitted after settlement, the scheduled hearing was canceled, and the case was dismissed.
  • Key point: The Judge dismissed the discrimination proceeding after the parties reached an agreeable settlement.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
LARRY HATTON V. ADENA FUELS
DDATE:
19941229
TTEXT:


Page 2

~2562

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
2 SKYLINE, 10th FLOOR
5203 LEESBURG PIKE
FALLS CHURCH, VA. 22041

LARRY E. HATTON,
: DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
Complainant :
v. : Docket No. KENT 94-57-D
: MSHA Case No. BARB CD 93-10
ADENA FUELS, INCORPORATED, :
Respondent : Diamond No. 1 Mine

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Appearances: Tony Oppegard, Esq., Mine Safety Project of the Appalachian Research and Defense Fund of Kentucky, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky, for the Complainant;
Jerry Wayne Slone, Esq., Weinberg, Campbell and Slone, Hindman, Kentucky, for the Respondent.

Before: Judge Melick

Following initial commencement and postponement of hearings, Complainant Larry E. Hatton, in effect, requested approval to withdraw on the grounds that the parties had reached an agreeable settlement of the underling matter. Under the circumstances herein, permission to withdraw is granted. 29 C.F.R. 2700.11. This case is therefore dismissed and the continuation of hearings

scheduled for January 24, 1995, is cancelled.

Gary Melick
Administrative Law Judge
Distribution:

Tony Oppegard, Mine Safety Project of the Appalachian Research and Defense Fund of Kentucky, Inc., 630 Maxwelton Court, Lexington, KY 40508 (Certified Mail)

Jerry Wayne Slone, Esq., Weinberg, Campbell and Slone, P.O. Box 727, Main St., Hindman, KY 41822 (Certified Mail)

/lt

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