Eagle Cornice Co., Inc.
Commission declines review and lets the judge's decision stand
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
This is a short Commission order in a case involving Eagle Cornice Co., Inc. After an Administrative Law Judge ruled on the case, former Commissioner Moran directed it for review. The employer filed a petition and brief urging the Commission to affirm the judge's decision, and asked the Commission not to reach the issues it raised if the decision was affirmed. The Secretary of Labor took no exception to the judge's decision. Because no party took issue with how the judge disposed of the case, the Commission declined to review it and affirmed the judge's decision. The underlying ALJ decision is not included in this release, so the specific standard cited, the violation, and the penalty are not stated here.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): Not stated in this release.
- Outcome: The Administrative Law Judge's decision was affirmed without merits review.
- Key point: When no party takes issue with the judge's disposition, the Commission declines to review, and the judge's decision carries the weight of an unreviewed judge's decision.
Full text (OSHRC public release)
Docket No. 76-1918
EAGLE CORNICE CO., INC.
�
OSHRC Docket No. 76-1918
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
June 3, 1977
�
[*1]
�
Before: BARNAKO, Chairman; and CLEARY, Commissioner.
�
COUNSEL:
Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL
Albert Ross, Regional Solicitor
Thomas W. Heald, for the employer
OPINION:
ORDER
BY THE COMMISSION: This case is before the Commission pursuant to an order for review by former Commissioner Moran.
�
Respondent has filed a petition for discretionary review and brief in which it urges the Commission to affirm the Judge's decision.
�
It also requests that the Commission not consider the issues raised therein if the Judge's decision is affirmed.
�
Complainant has not taken exception to the Judge's decision in any way.
�
Thus, no party has taken issue with the Judge's disposition of the case.
�
In these circumstances, the Commission will not review the case.
�
See Water Works Installation Corp., 76 OSAHRC 61/B8, 4 BNA OSHC 1339, 1976-77 CCH OSHD para. 20,780 (No. 4136, 1976); Crane Co., 76 OSAHRC 37/A2, 4 BNA OSHC 1015, 1975-76 CCH OSHD, 20,508 (No. 3336, 1976).
The Judge's decision is accorded the significance of an unreviewed Judge's decision.
�
Leone Constr. Co., 76 OSAHRC 12/E6, 3 BNA OSHC 1979, 1975-76 CCH OSHD para. 20,387 (No. 4090, 1976).
Accordingly, the Judge's decision [*2]
�
is affirmed.
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.