ORDERS:
AMENDED ORDER OF DISMISSAL
On March 11, 1999, I issued an Order of Dismissal in the above-captioned case that
contained errors. The Order of Dismissal should have been as follows:
Pursuant to my order dated February 4, 1999, each party in this contested case was required
to file a prehearing statement with the Administrative Law Judge Division and to serve the same on
all parties within fifteen (l 5) days of the date of the order. The Notice of Hearing ("Notice") and
Order for Prehearing Statements ("Order") were sent to the Petitioner by way of certified mail. On
February 23, 1999, the Division sent a letter along with the Notice and Order to the Petitioner by
way of certified and regular U.S. mail granting her an additional ten (10) days to respond to the
Order. The Petitioner did not respond to the letter requesting the filing of a prehearing statement by
March 5, 1999. Pursuant to ALJD Rule 23, this matter is hereby dismissed. This Rule 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 respond 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.
ALJD Rule 23 (1997) (emphasis added).
By virtue of Petitioner's request for a contested case, she has an obligation to defend her
position. Petitioner has not requested an extension or enlargement of time pursuant to ALJD Rule
3B to comply with this Division's order, but rather has been unresponsive to all communications.
Petitioner has been given abundant opportunity to comply. "There is a limit beyond which the
court should not allow a litigant to consume the time of the court . . . ." Georganne Apparel, Inc. v.
Todd, 303 S.C. 87, 92, 399 S.E.2d 16, 19 (Ct. App. 1990).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Order of Dismissal in above-captioned case
isssued on March 11, 1999, be amended as set forth above.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________________________
Ralph K. Anderson, III
Administrative Law Judge
March 12, 1999
Columbia, South Carolina |