RESPONDENT:Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
LOCATION:County of Riverside: District Attorney
DOCKET NO.: 89-1541
DECIDED BY: Rehnquist Court (1990-1991)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
CITATION: 499 US 144 (1991)
ARGUED: Nov 27, 1990
DECIDED: Mar 20, 1991
ADVOCATES:
Clifford M. Sloan – on behalf of the Petitioner
John D. Faught – on behalf of the Respondents
Question
Media for Martin v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement – March 20, 1991 in Martin v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
William H. Rehnquist:
The opinion of the Court in two cases will be announced by Justice Marshall.
Thurgood Marshall:
This case is Martin versus Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, No. 89-1541.
That case is here on certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act authorizes a Secretary of Labor to prosecute civil penalty actions before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
The question here in this case is whether a reviewing court should defer to the Secretary or to the Commission when these two actions act or disagree on the interpretation of a regulation.
In an opinion filed with the Clerk today, we hold that a court must divert to the Secretary under the circumstances.
We, therefore, reverse the judgment of the Tenth Circuit.
