I.T.O. Corporation of New England; John T. Clark & Son of Boston, Inc.; Terminal Services, Inc.
Withdrawn contests reinstate citations
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 1977, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
An Administrative Law Judge had vacated citations against three employers in five consolidated dockets. After that decision, the employers asked to withdraw their notices of contest and terminate the proceedings. The Commission granted the request because it served the purposes of the OSH Act. It set aside the judge's decision and affirmed the citations and their proposed penalties. The release does not identify the specific standards, underlying conditions, or penalty amounts.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): 29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(2)
- Outcome: The judge's vacation was set aside, and the citations and proposed penalties were affirmed.
- Key point: Withdrawal of the employers' notices of contest ended the dispute and allowed the citations and penalties to stand.
Full text (OSHRC public release)
Docket Nos. 12239; 12318; 13217; 13149;
I.T.O. CORPORATION OF NEW ENGLAND; JOHN T. CLARK & SON OF BOSTON, INC.; TERMINAL SERVICES, INC.
�
OSHRC Docket Nos. 12239; 12318; 13217; 13149; 14382
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
May 10, 1977
�
[*1]
�
Before BARNAKO; Chairman; CLEARY, Commissioner.
�
COUNSEL:
Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL
Albert Ross, Regional Solicitor
Leo F. Glynn, for the employer
OPINION:
ORDER
BY THE COMMISSION:
A decision of Administrative Law Judge Ben D. Worcester vacating Complainant's citations alleging that Respondents violated 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(2) n1 is before us for review.
�
Subsequent to Judge Worcester's decision the Respondents filed a motion requesting that their notices of contest to the citations be withdrawn and that these proceedings be terminated.
�
The motion serves the purposes of the Act and is therefore granted.
�
I.T.O. Corporation of New England, 75 OSAHRC 13/C12, 3 OSHC 1831, 1975-76 OSHD para. 20,242 (1975), aff'd, 540 F.2d 543 (1st Cir. 1976).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
n1 Section 5(a)(2) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq., hereinafter "the Act".
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -End Footnotes- -
�
[*2]
�
- -End Footnotes- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Accordingly, the judge's decision is set aside, and the citations and penalties proposed therefor are affirmed.
So ORDERED.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read Commission precedent from 1977. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.