South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

CAPTION:
Richard Darrin Blankenship vs. SCDMV

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles

PARTIES:
Appellant:
Richard Darrin Blankenship

Respondents:
South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
07-ALJ-21-0261-AP

APPEARANCES:
n/a
 

ORDERS:

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This case is before the Administrative Law Court (ALC or Court) pursuant to a Notice of Appeal filed by Appellant Richard Darrin Blankenship challenging a decision by the South Carolina Division of Motor Vehicle Hearings (DMVH) to deny Mr. Blankenship an administrative hearing regarding the suspension of his driver’s license. Mr. Blankenship’s driver’s license was suspended by the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-2990 (2006). His suspension began on May 4, 2007 and ended on May 4, 2008.

According to ALC Rule 37(A), “[t]he party first noticing the appeal shall file an original and two copies of its brief within thirty (30) days after the filing of the Record on Appeal.” In a letter filed with this Court on October 2, 2007, Yolanda Thornton, the Administrative Coordinator of the DMVH, stated that, since this matter “did not come through” the DMVH, the DMVH did not have a Record to send to this Court. However, as of the date hereof, Mr. Blankenship has not yet filed a brief with this Court. Administrative Law Court Rule 38 provides that:

Upon motion of any party, or on its own motion, an administrative law judge may dismiss an appeal for failure to comply with any of the rules of procedure for appeals, including the failure to comply with any of the time limits provided by this section.

This delay is well beyond the time period set forth in the Rules of Procedure for the ALC. As Mr. Blankenship has been afforded ample time to file his brief and has not notified the ALC of any extenuating circumstances regarding his failure to file, I conclude that this matter should be dismissed.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal be DISMISSED.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________

Ralph King Anderson, III

Administrative Law Judge

September 30, 2008

Columbia, South Carolina


~/pdf/070261.pdf
PDF

Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court