29 C.F.R. § 1926.550

[Reserved]

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 48 cases, 1974–2017 · leading case: Nat'l Eng'g & Contracting Co. v. Alexis M. Herman, United States Sec'y of Labor the Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 181 F.3d 715 (6th Cir. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nat'l Eng'g & Contracting Co. v. Alexis M. Herman, United States Sec'y of Labor the Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 181 F.3d 715 (6th Cir. 1999). · cites it 14× “OSHA cited NECCO for a violation of two OSHA crane standards, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (b)(2), 2 or in the alternative, 29 C.”

William E. Brock, Sec'y of Labor v. Bechtel Power Corp., 803 F.2d 999 (9th Cir. 1986). · cites it 8× “Brock, the Secretary of Labor (hereinafter Secretary), appeals from the decision of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (hereinafter Commission) vacating a citation charging Bechtel Power Corporation (hereinafter Bechtel) with a violation of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550…”

Lawson-Avila Constr., Inc. v. Stoutamire, 791 S.W.2d 584 (Tex. App. 1990). · cites it 3× “29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(4) (1989), provides: (4) Hand signals to crane and derrick operators shall be those prescribed by the applicable ANSI standard for the type of crane in use.”

Bell v. Vecellio & Grogan, Inc., 447 S.E.2d 269 (W. Va. 1994). · cites it 7× “Both witnesses testified that the condition of the crane violated 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (1993). Mr. Jones also testified that this crane was not the proper equipment to be used for moving the steel beams.”

H. B. Zachry Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 638 F.2d 812 (5th Cir. 1981). · cites it 3× “Did Cited Regulation Apply? Zachry next challenges the cited regulation, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(15)(i) (see Appendix I) as inapplicable to “mobil cranes”.”

Harry C. Crooker & Sons, Inc. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 537 F.3d 79 (1st Cir. 2008). · cites it 3× “Where, as here, the Secretary promulgates a regulation prohibiting construction equipment from operating within ten feet of power fines carrying up to 50 kV, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(15)(i), that regulation speaks for itself, periculum ipsa loquitur.”

6 O.S.H. Cas.(bna) 2039, 1978 O.S.H.D. (Cch) P 23,140 Danco Constr. Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n & Sec'y of Labor, 586 F.2d 1243 (8th Cir. 1978). · cites it 4× “00 for committing a serious violation of section 5(a)(2) 1 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and 29 C.F.R. 1926.550(a)(15). 2 We affirm. 2 * Danco is in the business of laying underground utilities.”

John W. McGowan v. F. Ray Marshall, Sec'y of Labor, & Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 604 F.2d 885 (5th Cir. 1979). · cites it 3× “The third cited violation consisted of the employer’s failure to comply with the reporting requirements of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(1), (b)(2), 7 which pertain to cranes.”

Modern Cont'l Constr. Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 305 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “Repeat Citation 2, Item 1, alleging a violation of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(19) for failing to assure that all employees were kept clear of suspended loads.”

Anthony Crane Rental, Inc. v. Robert B. Reich, Sec'y of Labor, 70 F.3d 1298 (D.C. Cir. 1995). · cites it 2× “29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(10). (Citation No.”

Associated Builders & Contractors Florida East Coast Chapter v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 594 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(1). If a state desires to override these federal occupational safety standards, the state must submit a plan for federal approval.”

Georgia Elec. Co. v. Marshall, 595 F.2d 309 (5th Cir. 1979). · cites it 4× “The citations alleged that the Company had committed (1) a willful and serious violation 1 of an *312 OSHA highway construction regulation, 29 CFR § 1926.550 (a)(15) 2 , by permitting its employees to erect a steel light pole within ten feet of an electrical transmission line…”

Show all 48 citing cases →

— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550(a)(1) — 1 case

James v. Alpha Painting & Constr. Co., Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op 5692 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017).

— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550(a)(15) — 3 cases

6 O.S.H. Cas.(bna) 2039, 1978 O.S.H.D. (Cch) P 23,140 Danco Constr. Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n & Sec'y of Labor, 586 F.2d 1243 (8th Cir. 1978). “00 for committing a serious violation of section 5(a)(2) 1 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and 29 C.F.R. 1926.550(a)(15). 2 We affirm. 2 * Danco is in the business of laying underground utilities.”

Danco Constr. Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 586 F.2d 1243 (8th Cir. 1978).

J.A.M. Builders, Inc. v. Alexis Herman, 233 F.3d 1350 (11th Cir. 2000).

— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550(a)(15)(i) — 6 cases

H. B. Zachry Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 638 F.2d 812 (5th Cir. 1981). “Did Cited Regulation Apply? Zachry next challenges the cited regulation, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550 (a)(15)(i) (see Appendix I) as inapplicable to “mobil cranes”.”

Acuff v. Comm'r of the Tennessee Dep't of Labor, 554 S.W.2d 627 (Tenn. 1977).

Ames Crane & Rental Serv., Inc. v. Dunlop, 532 F.2d 123 (8th Cir. 1976).

Danco Constr. Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 586 F.2d 1243 (8th Cir. 1978).

— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550(a)(9) — 3 cases

7 O.S.H. Cas.(bna) 1313, 1979 O.S.H.D. (Cch) P 23,541 Concrete Constr. Co., Inc. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, & Ray Marshall, Sec'y of Labor, 598 F.2d 1031 (6th Cir. 1979).

All Erection & Crane Rental Corp. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 507 F. App'x 511 (6th Cir. 2012).

Concrete Constr. Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 598 F.2d 1031 (6th Cir. 1979).

— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.550(b)(2) — 1 case

Beaty Constr., Inc. v. Bd. of Saf. Review, 912 N.E.2d 824 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.