29 C.F.R. § 4.189
Administrative proceedings relating to enforcement of labor standards
The Secretary is authorized pursuant to the provisions of section 4(a) of the Act to hold hearings and make decisions based upon findings of fact as are deemed to be necessary to enforce the provisions of the Act. Pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act, the Secretary's findings of fact after notice and hearing are conclusive upon all agencies of the United States and, if supported by the preponderance of the evidence, conclusive in any court of the United States, without a trial de novo. United States v. Powers Building Maintenance Co., 336 F. Supp. 819 (W.D. Okla. 1972). Rules of practice for administrative proceedings are set forth in parts 6 and 8 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1986–2009 · leading case: Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Servs., Inc., 172 Cal. App. 4th 654 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).
Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Servs., Inc., 172 Cal. App. 4th 654 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). “” ( 29 C.F.R. § 4.189 (2008).) Employees who contend "their employer has underpaid them in contravention of the SCA or its regulations may complain to the Secretary, who is authorized (following an administrative adjudication) to ensure that the employees are compensated in…”
Amcor, Inc., a Florida Corp. v. William E. Brock, Sec'y of Labor, 780 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1986). “Although Amcor complains of the lack of a finding of clearly erroneous by the administrator because that functionary merely adopted the brief of the solicitor of the Department of Labor as his own findings, this, of course, is no valid objection to such findings.”
Karawia v. United States Dep't of Labor, 627 F. Supp. 2d 137 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). “” 29 C.F.R. § 4.189 (emphasis added). 10 . Of relevance to the procedural posture of this case, the Circuit has also noted that in an action under IDEA, a motion for summary judgment "often triggers more than an inquiry into possible disputed issues of fact .”
Summitt Investigative Serv., Inc. v. Herman, 34 F. Supp. 2d 16 (D.D.C. 1998). “See 29 C.F.R. § 4.189 ; Federal Food Serv., 658 F.”
United Int'l Investigative Servs., Inc. v. United States, 56 Fed. Cl. 619 (Fed. Cl. 2003). “” 29 C.F.R. § 4.189 . 20 The administrative scheme as outlined in the SCA does not allow for suit by a successor contractor against the agency for violations on the part of a predecessor contractor, nor for suit by the aggrieved employees directly against either the successor or…”
United States v. Hunter L. Todd A/K/A Todd Hunter D/B/A Courier Express Mail & Package Delivery Serv., 38 F.3d 277 (6th Cir. 1994). “§ 39); 29 C.F.R. § 4.189 . II In this case, the Secretary charged that Todd had failed to comply with the Act’s minimum wage and benefits requirements, 41 U.”
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.