Worldwide Mfg., Inc. v. Secretary of Labor , 22 F. App'x 684 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 00-3367
    ___________
    World Wide Manufacturing, Inc.,       *
    *
    Petitioner,              * Petition for Review from
    * Secretary of Labor,
    v.                              * Occupational Safety and
    * Health Review Commission
    Secretary of Labor; Occupational      *
    Safety and Health Review Commission, *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Respondents.             *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 12, 2001
    Filed: December 6, 2001
    ___________
    Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, BOWMAN and STAHL,1 Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    World Wide Manufacturing, Inc. (World Wide), petitions for review of a
    decision of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (the
    Commission) on an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) citation
    issued by the Secretary of Labor (the Secretary) to World Wide. The Commission
    found that World Wide willfully violated the Occupational Safety and Health Act of
    1
    The Honorable Norman H. Stahl, United States Circuit Judge for the First
    Circuit, sitting by designation.
    1970, 29 U.S.C. §§ 651-78 (1994), and assessed penalties for those violations in the
    total amount of $53,800.
    We have carefully considered the briefs and the record. In response to World
    Wide's arguments for reversal, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the
    Commission's findings that World Wide committed willful OSHA violations. In
    addition, we are satisfied the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) did not abuse his
    discretion by granting the Secretary's motion to amend the citation to allege that
    World Wide's OSHA violations were willful. We also are satisfied that in the
    circumstances of this case the penalties assessed by the Commission should be
    sustained. Though this Court, were it sitting as the Commission, might be inclined
    to accept the substantially lower penalties assessed by the ALJ, on this record we
    cannot say that the Commission abused its discretion by assessing higher penalties.
    The decision of the Commission is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 00-3367

Citation Numbers: 22 F. App'x 684

Filed Date: 12/6/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023