C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER XVII—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › PART 1982—PROCEDURES FOR THE HANDLING OF RETALIATION COMPLAINTS UNDER THE NATIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEMS SECURITY ACT AND THE FEDERAL RAILROAD SAFETY ACT › Subpart C—Miscellaneous Provisions

29 C.F.R. § 1982.112

Judicial review

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

(a) Within 60 days after the issuance of a final order (including a decision issued by the Secretary upon his or her discretionary review) for which judicial review is available, any person adversely affected or aggrieved by the order may file a petition for review of the order in the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the violation allegedly occurred or the circuit in which the complainant resided on the date of the violation.

(b) A final order is not subject to judicial review in any criminal or other civil proceeding.

(c) If a timely petition for review is filed, the record of a case, including the record of proceedings before the ALJ, will be transmitted by the ARB or the ALJ, as the case may be, to the appropriate court pursuant to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the local rules of such court.

[80 FR 69132, Nov. 9, 2015, as amended at 85 FR 30623, May 20, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2013–2021 · leading case: Paul Gunderson v. BNSF Ry. Co., 850 F.3d 962 (8th Cir. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Paul Gunderson v. BNSF Ry. Co., 850 F.3d 962 (8th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “See § 20109(d)(4); 29 C.F.R. § 1982.112 (a), (b). The statute is silent on the question BNSF raises -- whether a claimant’s conduct after his right to file a “kick-out” lawsuit has vested can waive his right to commence an action in district court.”
Sparre v. U.S. Dep't of Labor, 924 F.3d 398 (7th Cir. 2019). “§ 20109 (d)(4) ; 29 C.F.R. § 1982.112 (a). We address only No.”
Norfolk S. Ry. Co. v. Solis, 915 F. Supp. 2d 32 (D.C. Cir. 2013). “§ 20109 (d)(4); 29 C.F.R. § 1982.112 . District courts have jurisdiction in § 20109 actions in two limited circumstances.”
Soo Line R.R. Co. v. Admin. Rev. Bd US Labor Dept., 990 F.3d 596 (8th Cir. 2021). · cites it 4× “§ 20109 (d)(4); 29 C.F.R. § 1982.112 (a), permits a federal court of appeals to review a “final” order issued by the Secretary of Labor.”
Gunderson v. BNSF Ry. Co., 29 F. Supp. 3d 1259 (D. Minnesota 2014). “§ 20109 (d)(4); 29 C.F.R. § 1982.112 . Under certain circumstances, however, employees have the right to abandon the administrative process and file an original action in federal district court.”
John Sparre v. LABR (7th Cir. 2019). “18‐1105, 18‐2348 Sparre filed a second appeal—this time, a timely petition for review of the Board’s decision, docketed with this court as No. 18‐2348. As a final order of the Secretary, this court has jurisdiction to review the Board’s decision that Sparre appeals in No.”
Dimauro v. Springfield Terminal Ry. Co., 187 F. Supp. 3d 205 (D. Me. 2016). “at § 42121(b)(4); 29 C.F.R. § 1982.112 (a). That, too, is not what happened here.”
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.