Pan American Tanning Corporation (Commission decision, August 21, 1991)

Plain-English summary

The judge allowed the Secretary to use a complaint prepared under Commission procedures that had been superseded in 1986. Pan American Tanning sought interlocutory review of that ruling. The Commission granted review, struck the complaint, and required the Secretary to file a new complaint complying with current Rule 35 within 30 days. Commissioner Montoya dissented and would have accepted the complaint already filed.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): None identified in this procedural order.
• Outcome: Interlocutory review was granted, the complaint was stricken, and a compliant replacement was ordered within 30 days.
• Key point: A judge could not waive the current pleading requirements and accept a complaint prepared under superseded procedural rules.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 90-3207

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v.

PAN AMERICAN TANNING CORPORATION,

Respondent.

OSHRC DOCKET NO. 90-3207

ORDER

On July 26, 1991, Respondent filed a Petition for Interlocutory Review pursuant to Commission Rule 73, 29 C.F.R. 2200.73. Respondent requests the Commission to review and set aside an order issued by Administrative Law Judge Irving Sommer on July 22, 1991. The order waived the requirements of Commission Rule 35 and permitted the Secretary to file a complaint pursuant to the Rules of Procedure in effect prior to December 8, 1986.

Having considered the matter presented, the Commission grants Respondent's Petition for Interlocutory Review. The Commission orders the Secretary's complaint to be stricken from the record and orders the Secretary to file a new complaint, which complies with the present Commission Rule 35, with Judge Sommer within 30 days of the date of this order.[[1]]

Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.

Chairman

Donald G. Wiseman

Commissioner

Dated: August 21, 1991

SECRETARY OF LABOR

Complainant

v.

PAN AMERICAN TANNING CORPORATION

Respondent

Docket No. 90-3207

ORDER

Motion by the Secretary for Reconsideration of the June 26, 1991, ORDER directing filing of a Complaint in compliance with current Rule 35 of the Commission's Rule of Procedure is opposed.

After due consideration of all filings, the ORDER dated June 26, 1991, is vacated. The Complaint filed May 13, 1991, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure in effect prior to December 8, 1986, is accepted.

The Respondent is directed to file an answer to the Complaint within 30 days of the receipt of this ORDER.

IRVING SOMMER

JUDGE OSHRC

DATED: JULY 22 1991

WASHINGTON, D.C.

FOOTNOTES:

[[1]] Commissioner Montoya dissents. She would deny the Respondent's Petition for Interlocutory Review and accept the complaint that has already been filed.