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:
William W. Camp vs. SCDHEC et al.

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control

PARTIES:
Petitioner:
William W. Camp

Respondent:
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Office of Ocean and Coastal Management, and Larry H. Goldman
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
01-ALJ-07-0438-CC

APPEARANCES:
For the Petitioner: No Appearance

For the Department: Leslie W. Stidham, Esquire

For Respondent Goldman: Pro Se
 

ORDERS:

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

This matter comes before the Administrative Law Judge Division (Division) pursuant to

S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq. (1986 & Supp. 2000) and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 48-39-10, et seq. (1987 & Supp. 2000) for a contested case hearing. On September 24, 2001, the Petitioner timely contested the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management's (OCRM) issuance of a permit for the construction of additions to an existing bulkhead at 78 Dolphin Point Road, Beaufort County, South Carolina. On November 8, 2001, I scheduled this matter to be heard on February 26, 2002 at the offices of the Division in Columbia, South Carolina.

Prior to the hearing into this matter, on January 18, 2002, the Petitioner filed a request for a ninety (90) day continuance based on discovery matters and professional and personal matters. This request was denied by my Order dated January 22, 2002. (1) On February 2, 2002, the Petitioner filed a second request for a continuance, again citing discovery matters as the basis for that request. The parties were verbally informed by this office that the Petitioner's second continuance request was denied. Thereafter, at the behest of the Petitioner, a phone conference was held regarding the second continuance request and why it was denied. At the conclusion of that conference, the Petitioner informed the parties that he would not attend the hearing.

A hearing was held on February 26, 2002, at which time the Petitioner did not make an appearance. Upon Motion of OCRM for dismissal for failure to prosecute, the Division then dismissed this action with prejudice under Administrative Law Judge Division Rule 23. Rule 23 provides:

The administrative law judge may dismiss a contested case or dispose of a contested case adverse to the defaulting party. A default occurs when a party fails to plead or otherwise prosecute or defend, fails to appear at a hearing without the proper consent of the judge or fails to comply with any interlocutory order of the administrative law judge. Any non-defaulting party may move for an order dismissing the case or terminating it adversely to the defaulting party.



Because the Petitioner did not appear before the Division at the time of the hearing into this matter,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT dock permit number OCRM-01-936 issued to Larry Goldman is hereby affirmed.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.







_______________________________

Ralph King Anderson, III

Administrative Law Judge





February 26, 2002

Columbia, South Carolina



1. The Petitioner's continuance requests were denied because this matter had been set for hearing since November 8, 2001, and because the time for discovery had expired and the Petitioner did not request that the time for discovery be expanded or re-opened. See ALJD Rule 21.


Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court