Ezel / Agency Decisions / WEST 80-491-D

Stephen B. Woody v. Mid-Continent Resources, Inc. (ALJ decision, January 10, 1984)

Stephen B. Woody v. Mid-Continent Resources, Inc. (FMSHRC WEST 80-491-D): Discrimination complaint withdrawn with prejudice

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
WEST 80-491-D
Decided
January 10, 1984
Presiding judge
John A. Carlson
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-21
Cited standards
29 C.F.R. § 2700.11
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1984 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 1984
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 under the Mine Act's 40-day rule
This administrative law judge decision became a final decision of the Commission because no Commissioner directed review within 40 days, under 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1). It is binding on 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

Stephen Woody brought a discrimination complaint against Mid-Continent Resources. After the judge ordered him to explain why the case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution, Woody asked to withdraw the complaint. Judge John A. Carlson granted the motion under the Commission's procedural rule and dismissed the case with prejudice. The order states no findings on the discrimination claim and awards no relief.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited rule: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.11, governing withdrawal of a pleading.
  • Outcome: Complaint dismissed with prejudice and proceeding terminated; no relief awarded.
  • Key point: Woody withdrew the complaint in response to a show cause order about lack of prosecution.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
STEPHEN WOODY V. MID-CONTINENT
DDATE:
19840110
TTEXT:
~51

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

STEPHEN B. WOODY,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
COMPLAINANT
v. Docket No. WEST 80-491-D
MID-CONTINENT RESOURCES, INC.,
RESPONDENT
MSHA Case No. ID 05-00301

Dutch Creek No. 1 Mine

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Carlson

In response to an order to show cause why this discrimination case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution, complainant has filed a motion to withdraw his complaint.

Pursuant to Commission Rule 2700.11, the motion is granted. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed with prejudice and this proceeding is terminated.

SO ORDERED.

John A. Carlson
Administrative Law Judge

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