Davidson Mining, Inc.
Davidson Mining, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 86-87-D): Discrimination case dismissed
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.
Plain-English summary
Johnny Wall’s discrimination case against Davidson Mining was scheduled for hearing after the parties reported that they had agreed to settle. The hearing was cancelled, but the parties did not file their promised joint settlement agreement or otherwise update the judge. After a show-cause order also went unanswered, Judge George A. Koutras dismissed the case.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standards: None stated in the decision.
- Outcome: The discrimination proceeding was dismissed for failure to respond to the judge’s orders.
- Key point: A reported settlement does not end an administrative case until the parties complete the required filing and respond to the judge’s orders.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
JOHNNY WALL V. DAVIDSON MINING
DDATE:
19861203
TTEXT:
Page 2
~1877
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
Office of Administrative Law Judges
JOHNNY WALL, DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
COMPLAINANT
Docket No. WEVA 86-87-D
v. MSHA Case No. HOPE CD 86-1
DAVIDSON MINING, INC., No. 1 Mine
RESPONDENT
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Before: Judge Koutras
Statement of the Case
This discrimination case was scheduled for a hearing on
October 21, 1986, in Beckley, West Virginia, and the parties were
so informed by my Notice of Hearing of August 6, 1986. On
September 25, 1986, complainant's counsel Kathryn R. Bayless
advised me by telephone that the parties agreed to settle the
matter, and that they would file their joint settlement agreement
with me within the next week. In view of the settlement, the
scheduled hearing was cancelled, and the parties were so informed
by my order of October 9, 1986. The parties were requested to
file their settlement agreement with me by October 19, 1986. They
have failed to do so.
In view of the failure by the parties to file their
settlement agreement with me, or to otherwise communicate with me
regarding the status of the case, I issued an order on November
11, 1986, directing the parties to show cause why this matter
should not be dismissed because of their failure to respond to my
orders. The parties have again failed to respond.
ORDER
In view of the failure by the parties to respond to my
Orders, this matter IS DISMISSED.
George A. Koutras
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.