Perdue Foods, Inc.
Partial settlement order remanded for unresolved item
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 2017, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Perdue Foods and the Secretary submitted a settlement agreement that expressly excluded Citation 1, Item 2 because Perdue intended to continue contesting it. The judge nevertheless approved the settlement and the order was docketed, even though the agreement did not resolve the entire case. Within the review period, the Secretary sought remand and Perdue sought permission to file a late answer. The Commission remanded the case for the judge to consider those pending matters and the unresolved citation item.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): None specified in the decision.
- Outcome: The case was remanded because the settlement order did not resolve Citation 1, Item 2.
- Key point: A settlement order cannot fully dispose of a case when the agreement expressly leaves a contested citation item unresolved.
Full text (OSHRC public release)
PERDUE FOODS, INC., OSHRC DOCKET No. 16-1778
2017-01-26
Acrobat PDFMaker 11 for Word
2018-08-06
Clean
Clean
false
5.5 pt
2
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE
United States of America
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
���������� 1120 20 th � Street, N.W., Ninth Floor Washington, DC 20036-3457
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
����������������������������� Complainant,
������������������������
v.
OSHRC Docket No. 16-1778
PERDUE FOODS, INC.,
���������������������������� Respondent.
APPEARANCES:
Karen E. Mock, Counsel; Stanley
E. Keen, Regional Solicitor; M. Patricia Smith, Solicitor of Labor; U.S.
Department of Labor, Washington, DC
For the Complainant
Raymond
Perez, Jackson Lewis P.C., Atlanta, GA For the
Respondent
REMAND ORDER
Before: M AC DOUGALL,
Acting Chairman; and ATTWOOD, Commissioner. BY THE COMMISSION:
Chief Administrative Law Judge Covette Rooney issued a
December 14, 2016 Order Approving Stipulated Settlement Agreement between
Perdue Foods, Inc., and the Secretary. The parties stated in an informal
settlement agreement dated October 13, 2016, that Citation 1, Item 2 was � excluded � from �
the � agreement � as �
Respondent � intended � to �
contest � it. ��� See � 29 � C.F.R.
� 2200.100(b) (requiring that settlement agreement specify the terms for
each contested item and �specify any contested item . . . that remains to be
decided�). Although the informal settlement agreement did not fully resolve the
case, the judge issued an order, and it was submitted for docketing and
subsequently docketed on December 19, 2016, thereby commencing the thirty-day
period before �[t]he report of the administrative law judge . . . become[s] the
final order of the Commission.� 29 U.S.C. � 661(j) (�The report of the
administrative law judge shall become the
final order of the Commission within thirty days after such report by the administrative law judge, unless within
such period any Commission member
has directed that such report
shall be reviewed by the Commission.�); 29 C.F.R. �
2200.90(b)(2) (�Promptly upon receipt of the Judge�s report, the Executive
Secretary shall docket the report and notify all parties of the docketing date.�).
On January 11, 2017, within the thirty-day period under
section 12(j) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. � 661(j),
each party filed an unopposed motion with the Commission: the
Secretary filed an Unopposed Motion to Remand, and Respondent filed an
Unopposed Motion to Allow Late Answer and an Answer
to Complaint. Because
the judge�s order did
not fully resolve
the case, we remand it to the judge for further consideration of these pending matters.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ ��������������������������������������������������������
Heather L. MacDougall
Acting Chairman
/s/ ��������������������������������������������������������
Cynthia L.
Attwood
Dated:
January 25, 2017 �������������������������������������������� Commissioner
2
United
States of America
OCCUPATIONAL
SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
SECRETARY OF
LABOR,
Complainant,
v.
OSHRC DOCKET
NO. 16-1778
PERDUE
FOODS, INC.,
Respondent.
ORDER
APPROVING
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT
The
Commission has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case and over the
parties by virtue of the filing of a timely notice of
contest.
The stipulated settlement between the parties filed on 10/13/16 has been considered. The
parties certify that affected employees were properly notified of the
settlement on 10/19/16. No objection
to the settlement has been filed.
The settlement is approved under 5 U.S.C. � 554(c)(1) and Commission Rule
- 1 � The terms of the stipulated settlement
are incorporated, in their entirety, by reference in this order.
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� /s/
COVETTE ROONEY
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Chief
Judge, OSHRC
Dated: December
14, 2016 Washington, D.C.
� SHAPE
� * MERGEFORMAT
1 Rules
of Procedure of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 29 C.F.R.
�� 2200.1-.212 (1991).
1
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read Commission precedent from 2017. 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.