Soundtrack Chevell Industries, Inc

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF SOUNDTRACK CHEVELL INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL. Docket RHHR. Order, Apr. , 1975 OismissaJ of complaint as to respondent Tommie Tuhb; denial of motions of three other individual respondents for dismissal of complaint as to them; and denial of law judge s recommendation that matter he withdrawn from adjudication for consent negotiations.

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT AS TO RESPONDENT TUBB AND DENYING MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS TO OTHER RESPONDENTS On Mar. 4, 1975 , the Commission sua sponte issued an order directing complaint couns.el to show cause why this complaint should not be dismissed as to respondent Tommie Tubb HecentIy, the administrative law judge certified to the Commission handwritten letters from . For apl"'araT\ce ee p- I)!;. herein 794 Order respondents Wiliam, Helen, and Lonnie Temple, and from the corporate respondent, which he construed as motions to dismiss the complaint as to them for lack of puhlic interest. The law judge reeommended that these motions he denied, but that this matter be withdrawn from adjudication for thirty days for the purpose of pursuing settlement proposals contained in the letters. Complaint counsel have responded to the Show Cause order and motions to dismiss, and respondent William Temple has filed handwritten replies.

With respect to the Show Cause order, complaint counsel have offered no information tending to suggest Tubb exercised meaningful control over the acts or practices of the corporate respondent. Accordingly, the Commission now believes the public interest would not be served by litigating the charges alleged against him. With respect to the motions to dismiss, nothing raised in regard to the remaining respondents has altered the Commission s original reason to believe a proceeding as to them would be in the public interest.

Concerning the Jaw judge s suggestion that this matter be withdrawn from adjudication to consider the settlement proposals of certain of these respondents, two of them have asked that we appoint counsel to represent them on grounds of indigency and, until the law judge makes his recommendation on that issue, we believe such settlement negotiations would be inappropriate. Accordingly, It is ordered That as to respondent Tommie Tuhb, the complaint in the above-captioned matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed; It is furt.her ordered That the motions of respondents William F. Temple, Helen Temple, and Lonnie Temple, requesting that this complaint be dismissed as to them be, and they hereby are, denied: It is furt.her ordered That the law judge s recommendation that this matter be withdrawn from adjudication for consent negotiations be and it hereby is, denied.

Commissioners Hanford and Nye dissent from the dismissal of this complaint as to respondent Tommie Tubb for the reasons set forth in their dissenting statement of Mar. 4, 1975, (p 405 herein) to the Order to Show Cause.

Complaint l-5 F.