29 C.F.R. § 2200.2
Scope of rules; applicability of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; construction
(a) Scope. These rules shall govern all proceedings before the Commission and its Judges.
(b) Applicability of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In the absence of a specific provision, procedure shall be in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
(c) Construction. These rules shall be construed to secure an expeditious, just, and inexpensive determination of every case.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1975–2024 · leading case: Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 35 F.3d 600 (1st Cir. 1994).
Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 35 F.3d 600 (1st Cir. 1994). “R. § 3.24 (1994) (FTC); 21 C.F.R. § 12.93 (1994) (FDA); 47 C.”
Andre Lesgras v. Aetna Life Ins., 786 F.3d 1233 (9th Cir. 2015). “27 (a) (same); 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b) (applying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which includes Rule 6(a), where no specific 10 LEGRAS V.”
F & H Coatings, LLC v. Acosta, 900 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2018). “71 , in "all proceedings before the Commission and its Judges," 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 . It appears that this regulation supplants the more flexible evidentiary standards generally applicable to agency adjudication under the Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"), see 5 U.”
Elaine Chao, Sec'y, Dep't of Labor v. Gunite Corp., 442 F.3d 550 (7th Cir. 2006). “The Commission generally follows the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b), but it does so in a manner designed to “secure an expeditious, just and inexpensive determination of every case.”
Chao v. Roy's Constr., Inc., 517 F.3d 180 (3rd Cir. 2008). “” 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b) (2007). Nothing in the Commission Rules specifically addresses the merger rule, but the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are also silent about it.”
Bianchi Trison Corp. v. Elaine L. Chao, Sec'y of Labor, 409 F.3d 196 (3rd Cir. 2005). “§ 661 (g); 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b). While the Commission has adopted procedural rules governing discovery, these rules do not address expert testimony specifically.”
Ocean Elec. Corp. v. Sec'y of Labor, 594 F.2d 396 (4th Cir. 1979). “29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (a). Section 2200.73(a) states that “[i]n all proceedings commenced by the fil *402 ing of a notice of contest, the burden of proof shall rest with the Secretary.”
Cornell & Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 573 F.2d 820 (3rd Cir. 1978). “Cornell argues that the amendment changed the legal and factual basis of the alleged violation, thereby preventing it from presenting its sole defense.”
J. I. Hass Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 648 F.2d 190 (3rd Cir. 1981). “” See also 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b) (1980). . Section 12(g) of the Act states that the federal rules govern Commission proceedings.”
Tri-State Steel Constr. Co. v. Herman, 164 F.3d 973 (6th Cir. 1999). “Rather, petitioners argue that the monetary sanctions provided in Rule 11 were incorporated into the Commission’s Rules by operation of Commission Rule 2(b), 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b), which states: “In the absence of a specific provision, procedure shall be in accordance with the…”
S. Colorado Prestress Co. v. Occupational Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 586 F.2d 1342 (10th Cir. 1978). “The Commission’s procedural rules also provide at 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b): In the absence of a specific provision, procedure shall be in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”
Graphic Commc'ns Int'l Union, Local 554 v. Salem-Gravure Div. of World Color Press, Inc., 843 F.2d 1490 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2 (b), the Commission adheres to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”
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.