Secretary of Labor (MSHA) v. Halquist Stone Company, Inc. (Commission decision, July 6, 1981)
Secretary of Labor (MSHA) v. Halquist Stone Company, Inc. (FMSHRC VINC 79-118-PM): Inspection refusal and $700 penalty affirmed
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 1981, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Halquist Stone challenged a judge's finding that it prevented an MSHA inspector from continuing an inspection. The Commission said its decision in Waukesha Lime and Stone Company, issued the same day, resolved the legal question in the Secretary's favor. It also rejected Halquist's claim that it had not stopped the inspection because substantial evidence supported the judge's finding. The Commission affirmed the violation and the $700 penalty.
Decision snapshot
- Governing provision: Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977; the decision applies the Commission's Waukesha ruling on inspection refusal.
- Outcome: Violation finding and $700 penalty affirmed.
- Key point: Substantial evidence supported the finding that Halquist prevented the inspector from continuing his inspection.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
MSHA V. HALQUIST STONE
DDATE:
19810706
TTEXT:
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY & HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. July 6, 1981 SECRETARY OF LABOR, MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
v. Docket No. VINC 79-118-PM
HALQUIST STONE COMPANY, INC.
DECISION
This case arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. $801 et seq. (Supp. III 1979), and raises the same legal questions that were before us in Waukesha Lime and Stone Company. Inc., Docket No. 79-66-PM (July 6, 1981 ). Our decision in Waukesha resolves this question in the Secretary's favor. Accordingly, we affirm the judge's finding of a violation and his assessment of a $700 penalty. 1/ We reject Halquist's assertion that it did not prevent the inspector from continuing his inspection. Substantial evidence supports the judge's contrary finding.
~1701
Distribution
Michael A. McCord, Esq.
U.S. Department of Labor
Office of the Solicitor
4015 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22203
Paul Binzak, Esq.
Kraemer and Binzak, S.C.
16800 Appleton Avenue
Menomenee Falls, Wisconsin 53051
ALJ James A. Broderick
Chief Administrative Law Judge
FMSHRC
1730 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
Does this precedent still control your case?
Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace