Ezel / Agency Decisions / va-85-14-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket VA 85-14, VA 85-25 Decided May 30, 1986 Procedural Judge Roy J. Maurer

Dorothy Mae Coal Co., Inc.

Dorothy Mae Coal Co., Inc. (FMSHRC VA 85-14 and VA 85-25): Default penalties assessed at $7,260

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1986 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 1986
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 order, not Commission precedent
This decision by a FMSHRC Administrative Law Judge became the final decision of the Commission 40 days after issuance because the Commission did not direct review (30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1)). It binds the parties but is not binding on the Commission in other cases. 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

Dorothy Mae Coal Co., Inc. failed to answer MSHA interrogatories after an order compelling responses. It also failed to explain the noncompliance or respond to the Secretary's motion for default judgment. Judge Roy J. Maurer deemed the company to have waived its right to a hearing and made the proposed civil penalties the final order of the Commission. The company was ordered to pay $7,260 within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: None stated in the decision.
  • Outcome: Default was entered and the proposed $7,260 in civil penalties was made final.
  • Key point: Failure to comply with discovery orders and respond to a default motion can waive the right to a hearing and result in assessment of the proposed penalties.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. DOROTHY MAE COAL
DDATE:
19860530
TTEXT:

Page 2

~855

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

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. VA 85-14
PETITIONER A.C. No. 44-01904-03535

      v.                              Docket No. VA 85-25
                                      A.C. No. 44-01904-03540

DOROTHY MAE COAL CO., INC.,
RESPONDENT No. 16 Mine

                          DEFAULT DECISION

Before: Judge Maurer

 On May 12, 1986, a show cause order was issued in the

subject proceedings giving respondent until ten (10) days
thereafter to provide some explanation as to why it should not be
defaulted for failing to comply with my April 9, 1986, order
compelling answers to the petitioner's interrogatories.

 Petitioner's interrogatories, which I find to be reasonable

in number and in nature, were served upon the respondent on
February 28, 1986. On March 28, 1986, petitioner moved for an
order to compel answers. On April 9, 1986, I issued an order
compelling answers to those interrogatories, which order directed
respondent to serve responses "immediately" upon the petitioner.
On April 22, 1986, petitioner still had no answers to his
interrogatories and thus filed the instant motion for a default
judgment.

 Respondent, for its part, has failed to file either the

answers to the interrogatories, an explanation for not filing
those answers, or a response to the petitioner's motion for
default judgment and is accordingly deemed to have waived its
right to a hearing. The proposed civil penalties shall therefore
be made the final order of the Commission.

 WHEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that respondent pay the Secretary's

proposed civil penalties in the amount of $7,260 within 30 days
of this decision.

                           Roy J. Maurer
                           Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1986, 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.