December 2, 1999

Appeal of

J. LEONARD SPODEK

NATIONWIDE POSTAL MANAGEMENT

LEASE AGREEMENT

(Du Bois, PA Finance Stn.)

PSBCA No. 4232

(Montoursville, PA Main Post Office)

PSBCA Nos. 4244 & 4339

(San Antonio, TX – Wainwright Station)

PSBCA Nos. 4273 & 4329

APPEARANCE FOR APPELLANT:

J. Leonard Spodek

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:

Samuel J. Schmidt, Esq.

OPINION OF THE  BOARD ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

            Appellant has filed a letter with the Board, requesting that the Board reconsider its Opinion, J. Leonard Spodek, Nationwide Postal Management, PSBCA Nos. 4232, et al. (October 13, 1999), which directed Appellant to reimburse Respondent for the expenses it incurred in attempting to depose Appellant at a Board-ordered deposition.  We are treating Appellant's letter as a motion for reconsideration under 39 C.F.R. §955.30.

            Appellant contends that his medical condition, which led the Board, approximately one month after the scheduled deposition, to direct a 60-day suspension of all of Appellant's appeals, constitutes grounds for reconsideration of the Opinion.  Further, Appellant argues, as he did earlier, that Respondent's counsel was aware in advance that Appellant would not be "available" for the deposition.

            In reply to Appellant's motion, Respondent argues that Appellant has not offered any new facts or arguments and that the Board explicitly rejected Appellant's arguments in its Opinion.  Respondent also renews its motion to dismiss the appeals because of Appellant's failure to pay the costs, as ordered by the Board in its Opinion.[1]

            Having considered Appellant's motion and the parties' arguments, we agree with Respondent that Appellant has not raised any arguments or offered any evidence not considered previously by the Board.  The Board was aware of Appellant's medical condition and gave that condition consideration in deciding not to dismiss these appeals.  However, as stated in the earlier Opinion, there was not even a suggestion that Appellant could not have requested a continuance of the deposition ordered by the Board.  Since he did not do so, counsel for Respondent was entirely justified in traveling to the deposition site, prepared to proceed.

            The motion for reconsideration is denied, and the Board's original Opinion is affirmed.  Appellant is to pay the ordered costs no later than December 17, 1999.

David I. Brochstein

Administrative Judge

Vice Chairman

I concur:

James A. Cohen

Administrative Judge

Chairman

I concur:

William K. Mahn

Administrative Judge

Board Member

---

[1]   As a result of Appellant's failure to attend the Board-ordered deposition, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss these appeals and/or to direct that Appellant reimburse Respondent for the costs it incurred.  The Board denied the motion to dismiss, but ordered the reimbursement.