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:
Milton Felger vs. SCDHEC et al.

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control

PARTIES:
Petitioner:
Milton Felger

Respondent:
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, and Anthony Hoefer
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
98-ALJ-07-0305-CC

APPEARANCES:
n/a
 

ORDERS:

ORDER

This matter came before me for a hearing on Respondent, Anthony Hoefer's, Motion for Summary Judgment, at the South Carolina Administrative Law Judge Division, Edgar A. Brown Building, on February 24, 2000. Pursuant to Order of this Court dated January 27, 2000, the Petitioner above named was required to attend this hearing, either with or without counsel. Present before me was the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management by and through its counsel, and the Respondent Anthony D. Hoefer. Although duly served with the Order requiring his appearance, the Petitioner, Milton Felger, did not appear.

Based upon the pleadings in the cause, the evidence submitted pursuant to Rule 25 and 26, Rules of Civil Procedure for Administrative Law Judge Division, and Rule 41(b) of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, I find and conclude as follows:

That the Petitioner, Milton Felger, despite the requirement of this Court in its Order dated January 27, 2000, failed to appear at the hearing on February 24, 2000. The Court's Order specifically provided that the failure of the Petitioner to appear could result in the granting of the Motion of the Respondent Hoefer, and dismissal of this case. The Petitioner did not file a written Return or other response to oppose Respondent Hoefer's Motion. Pursuant to the terms of this Order, and pursuant to Rule 41(b) of South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, I find that the failure of the Petitioner to prosecute or comply with the Rules and Orders of this Court constitute grounds for the involuntary dismissal of the Petitioner's action.

In addition, based upon the evidence submitted by the Respondent Hoefer pursuant to Rules 25 and 26, Rules of Civil Procedure for the Administrative Law Judge Division, and upon the Joint Resolution of the General Assembly ratified April 28, 1999, and signed by the Governor of the State of South Carolina on May 3, 1999, I find that:

1) that the Respondent Hoefer is a real party in interest sufficient to qualify him to obtain from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, a permit to construct a dock;

2) that the dock proposed to be constructed will not have a deleterious impact on oystering;

3) that the Petitioner has no interest in the marshlands, or any right to harvest oysters in the area subject to the Respondent Hoefer's dock permit;

That based upon the foregoing, there remains no genuine issue as to any material fact, and the Respondent Hoefer's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the objection to application filed by the Petitioner, Milton R. Felger, be, and the same hereby is, dismissed and forever ended with prejudice, and the Motion of the Respondent Anthony D. Hoefer for Summary Judgment be, and the same hereby is, granted.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.







MARVIN F. KITTRELL

Chief Administrative Law Judge



February 24, 2000

Columbia, South Carolina.


Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2021 South Carolina Administrative Law Court