ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This matter came before the Administrative Law Judge Division (Division) pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-300 (Supp.
1998) and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq. (1986 and Supp. 1998) for a contested case hearing. Petitioner appealed
Oconee County's tax assessment for Parcel Number 520-29-07-014 for the 1999 tax year. A hearing was held in Columbia,
South Carolina at the offices of the Division at 2:00 p.m. on June 29, 2000. The Petitioner did not attend that hearing.
The first Notice of Hearing was mailed to the Petitioner via certified U.S. mail on April 24, 2000. That mailing was returned
to the Division as "unclaimed" on May 22, 2000. Thereafter, the Notice of Hearing was again mailed to the Petitioner via
certified U.S. mail as well as regular U.S. mail on May 22, 2000. That certified letter was returned to the Division as
"unclaimed" on June 13, 2000. However, as of the date of this hearing, the hearing notice mailed via regular mail has not
been returned to the Division.
On June 29, 2000, at 2:00 p.m., after waiting approximately ten (10) minutes for the Petitioner to appear, this hearing was
commenced. The Respondent made a motion that this action be dismissed. The Division then dismissed this action 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.
(Emphasis added).
"There is a limit beyond which the court should not allow a litigant to consume the time of the court . . . ." Georgian
Apparel, Inc. v. Todd, 303 S.C. 87, 92, 399 S.E. 2d 16, 19 (Ct. App. 1990). Therefore, because the Petitioner did not
appear before the Division, did not request a continuance, and has not otherwise contacted this tribunal regarding this
hearing as of the issuance of this Order,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case is dismissed.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________________________
Ralph King Anderson, III
Administrative Law Judge
June 30, 2000
Columbia, South Carolina |
