Secretary of Labor v. American Aggregates of Michigan, Inc.

Plain-English summary

An administrative law judge denied a settlement motion, later recused, requested reassignment, and certified the settlement ruling for interlocutory review. The Commission found that the ruling presented a controlling legal question whose immediate resolution could materially advance the case. It granted review on whether the judge abused his discretion in denying settlement and stayed briefing until a further order.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.
• Outcome: Interlocutory review of the settlement denial was granted, with briefing stayed.
• Key point: The Commission may immediately review a nonfinal settlement ruling when it presents a controlling legal question that could materially advance the proceeding.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
REVIEW COMMISSION

1331
PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20004-1710

SECRETARY OF LABOR,                              :

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH                     :                   Docket
No. LAKE 2018-0340

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)                        :

:

v.                                    
:

:

AMERICAN
AGGREGATES OF                    :

MICHIGAN, INC.
                                           :

:

ORDER

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety
and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.

§ 801 et seq. (2012). On February 14, 2019, the
Administrative Law Judge issued a decision denying a motion to approve
settlement. On May 24, 2019, the Judge issued an Order Accepting Appearance,
Rejecting Settlement, Recusing Undersigned, Requesting Reassignment, and
Certifying Case for Interlocutory Review.

Commission Procedural Rule 76(a), 29 C.F.R. § 2700.76(a), provides
that interlocutory review is not a matter of right
but of the sound discretion of the Commission. In addition, under Rule 76(a)(2), a majority of Commission members
must conclude that the Judge's
interlocutory ruling involves a controlling question
of law and that immediate review may materially advance the final disposition of the proceeding.

This standard having been
satisfied, we hereby grant review. The question on review is whether the Judge
abused his discretion in denying the Secretary’s motion to approve settlement.

Briefing is stayed pending further order of the
Commission.

/s/
Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr.

Marco
M. Rajkovich, Jr., Chairman

/s/
Mary Lu Jordan

Mary
Lu Jordan, Commissioner

/s/
Michael G. Young

Michael
G. Young, Commissioner

/s/
William I. Althen

William
I. Althen, Commissioner

/s/
Arthur R. Traynor, III

Arthur
R. Traynor, III, Commissioner