OSHRC Commission decision Docket 3777, 3882 Decided October 31, 1973 Procedural

Longview Brass & Aluminum Company

Case reinstated after answer located

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 1973, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1973
The OSHA standards may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Commission or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance; check subsequent history before relying on it. The full text below is from the official OSHRC release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official OSHRC release. The full text is the Commission's own document.
Read the official release (oshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

A Commission judge dismissed Longview Brass & Aluminum's notice of contest because the company appeared not to have answered the Secretary's complaint. The Commission's file showed that it had received an undated letter intended to serve as the company's answer in both docketed cases. That answer was not before the judge when he granted dismissal. The Commission directed review and reinstated the case so it could proceed.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): None identified in the official release.
  • Outcome: The dismissal for failure to answer was set aside and the case was reinstated.
  • Key point: A case could not remain dismissed for a missing answer when the Commission had timely received the employer's intended answer.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SECRETARY
OF LABOR,

��������������������������������������������
Complainant,

������������������������ v.

OSHRC DOCKET NOS. 3777 & 3882
(consolidated)

LONGVIEW
BRASS & ALUMINUM COMPANY,

���������������������������������������������
Respondent.

Direction
for Review and Reinstatement Order

�

October 31, 1973

Before MORAN, Chairman,
VAN NAMEE and CLEARY, Commissioners

MORAN, CHAIRMAN:

On
October 1, 1973, Review Commission Judge Herbert E. Bates granted complainant�s
motion dated September 10, 1973, to dismiss the respondent�s Notice of Contest
for failure to answer the complaint.

Review
of that order is hereby directed.

Inspection
of the Commission�s files in this matter reveals that respondent�s undated
letter, constituting an answer and received by the Commission on September 21,
1973, was intended to be effective as to two unconsolidated cases, OSAHRC
Docket No. 3777 and the instant case. Said answer was not before the
Administrative Law Judge in the instant case at the time he granted
complainant�s motion.

In
view of the above, the Commission hereby orders reinstatement of this case.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SECRETARY
OF LABOR,

��������������������������������������������
Complainant,

������������������������ v.

OSHRC DOCKET NOS. 3777 & 3882
(consolidated)

LONGVIEW
BRASS & ALUMINUM COMPANY,

���������������������������������������������
Respondent.

�

September 10, 1073

BATES, JUDGE, OSAHRC:

Ruling on Secretary�s
motion to dismiss; Granted.

�

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 1973. 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.