Filed: Sep. 30, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-4204 _ Jerry Bennett Masonry Contractors, * Inc., * * Petitioner, * Appeal from the Occupational * Safety and Health Review v. * Commission. * Secretary of Labor; Occupational * [UNPUBLISHED] Safety and Health Review Commission, * * Respondents. * _ Submitted: September 24, 1998 Filed: September 30, 1998 _ Before McMILLIAN, HEANEY, and FAGG, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. This appeal has been submitted on the briefs. Jerry Bennett Mas
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-4204 _ Jerry Bennett Masonry Contractors, * Inc., * * Petitioner, * Appeal from the Occupational * Safety and Health Review v. * Commission. * Secretary of Labor; Occupational * [UNPUBLISHED] Safety and Health Review Commission, * * Respondents. * _ Submitted: September 24, 1998 Filed: September 30, 1998 _ Before McMILLIAN, HEANEY, and FAGG, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. This appeal has been submitted on the briefs. Jerry Bennett Maso..
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 97-4204 _____________ Jerry Bennett Masonry Contractors, * Inc., * * Petitioner, * Appeal from the Occupational * Safety and Health Review v. * Commission. * Secretary of Labor; Occupational * [UNPUBLISHED] Safety and Health Review Commission, * * Respondents. * _____________ Submitted: September 24, 1998 Filed: September 30, 1998 _____________ Before McMILLIAN, HEANEY, and FAGG, Circuit Judges. _____________ PER CURIAM. This appeal has been submitted on the briefs. Jerry Bennett Masonry Contractors, Inc. contends the final order of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission is based on erroneous legal rulings, is not supported by substantial evidence in the record, and the penalties should not be enforced. Our review is governed by well-established standards. Having reviewed the record and the parties' submissions, we conclude the administrative law judge's determinations were correct and that an extended opinion is not warranted in this fact-intensive case. We affirm without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-
