Enos Miller (Commission decision, January 11, 2011)

Enos Miller (FMSHRC WEST 2008-1569-M): Default order left in place

Decision type
Commission decision
Docket
WEST 2008-1569-M
Decided
January 11, 2011
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Commission precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-08

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2011, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2011
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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

The Chief Administrative Law Judge entered default judgment after Enos Miller did not answer the Secretary's penalty petition or respond to a show-cause order. Miller sent the Commission a timely letter asking to set the default aside, and the Secretary did not oppose his request. The Commission treated the letter as a petition for discretionary review. It denied relief because Miller described financial pressures but did not explain the missed filings or give a reason why the default should be vacated.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(2) and 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.69(b) and 2700.70(a)
  • Outcome: The petition for review was denied, leaving the default judgment in place.
  • Key point: Financial hardship alone did not justify vacating a default when the petitioner did not explain why required responses were never filed.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW

SUITE 9500

WASHINGTON, DC 20001

January 11, 2011

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

ENOS MILLER

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. WEST 2008-1569-M

A.C. No. 24-02519-159643

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Duffy, Young, Cohen, and Nakamura, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On December 27, 2010, the Commission received from Enos Miller a letter seeking to set aside an order of Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick entering default judgment for the Secretary of Labor in this case. On January 10, 2011, the Commission received a response from the Secretary stating that she does not oppose Mr. Miller’s request.

The Chief Judge’s jurisdiction in this matter terminated when his default order was issued on December 2, 2010. 29 C.F.R. § 2700.69(b). Under the Mine Act and the Commission’s procedural rules, relief from a judge’s decision may be sought by filing a petition for review within 30 days of its issuance. 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(2); 29 C.F.R. § 2700.70(a). We construe the letter from Mr. Miller to be a timely filed petition for discretionary review.

On December 14, 2009, Chief Judge Lesnick issued a show cause order to Mr. Miller stating that he had failed to file an answer to a petition for penalty assessment sent to him by the Secretary of Labor on November 3, 2008 and that Mr. Miller would be found in default if he did not file an answer or show good cause for not doing so within 30 days of the order. On March 3, 2010, the Secretary filed a motion to dismiss the instant proceeding due to Mr. Miller’s failure to file an answer or respond to the judge’s show cause order. On December 2, 2010, Chief Judge Lesnick issued an order finding that Mr. Miller had failed to respond to the show cause order and entering a judgment by default for the Secretary.

In support of his petition, Mr. Miller states “it is increasingly difficult to have any time for anything but a losing battle to stay financially solvent.” Mr. Miller also asserts that he has laid off all employees that he can operate without thereby increasing the burden on him as the owner.

Because the petition filed by Mr. Miller does not explain why he failed to file an answer or to respond to the Chief Judge’s show cause order and does not provide any reasons why the default order should be vacated, we hereby deny the petition.


Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman


Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner


Michael G. Young, Commissioner


Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner


Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Enos Miller

341 Mountain View Rd.

Rexford, MT 59930

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick

Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 9500

Washington, D.C. 20001-2021

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation 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