29 U.S.C. § 662
Injunction proceedings
(a) Petition by Secretary to restrain imminent dangers; scope of orderThe United States district courts shall have jurisdiction, upon petition of the Secretary, to restrain any conditions or practices in any place of employment which are such that a danger exists which could reasonably be expected to cause death or serious physical harm immediately or before the imminence of such danger can be eliminated through the enforcement procedures otherwise provided by this chapter. Any order issued under this section may require such steps to be taken as may be necessary to avoid, correct, or remove such imminent danger and prohibit the employment or presence of any individual in locations or under conditions where such imminent danger exists, except individuals whose presence is necessary to avoid, correct, or remove such imminent danger or to maintain the capacity of a continuous process operation to resume normal operations without a complete cessation of operations, or where a cessation of operations is necessary, to permit such to be accomplished in a safe and orderly manner.
(b) Appropriate injunctive relief or temporary restraining order pending outcome of enforcement proceeding; applicability of Rule 65 of Federal Rules of Civil ProcedureUpon the filing of any such petition the district court shall have jurisdiction to grant such injunctive relief or temporary restraining order pending the outcome of an enforcement proceeding pursuant to this chapter. The proceeding shall be as provided by Rule 65 of the Federal Rules, Civil Procedure, except that no temporary restraining order issued without notice shall be effective for a period longer than five days.
(c) Notification of affected employees and employers by inspector of danger and of recommendation to Secretary to seek reliefWhenever and as soon as an inspector concludes that conditions or practices described in subsection (a) exist in any place of employment, he shall inform the affected employees and employers of the danger and that he is recommending to the Secretary that relief be sought.
(d) Failure of Secretary to seek relief; writ of mandamusIf the Secretary arbitrarily or capriciously fails to seek relief under this section, any employee who may be injured by reason of such failure, or the representative of such employees, might bring an action against the Secretary in the United States district court for the district in which the imminent danger is alleged to exist or the employer has its principal office, or for the District of Columbia, for a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary to seek such an order and for such further relief as may be appropriate.
(Pub. L. 91–596, § 13, Dec. 29, 1970, 84 Stat. 1605.)Editorial NotesReferences in TextRule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (b), is set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
Notes of Decisions
Jane Doe I v. Eugene Scalia, 58 F.4th 708 (3rd Cir. 2023).
· cites it 7× “The crux of this case concerns the extent to which Section 13(d) of 3 the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (“OSH Act”), 1 29 U.S.C. § 662 (d) gives employees a private right of action to remediate dangers in the workplace—specifically, whether an employee may maintain…”
Nat'l Elec. Contractors Ass'n v. Riveland, 5 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1322 (Wash. 1999).
· cites it 2× “See 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 662 , 666. Congress has set up a comprehensive system for the promulgation and enforcement of regulations and standards under OSHA.”
Sullivan v. Chief Just. for Admin. & Mgmt. of the Trial Court, 448 Mass. 15 (Mass. 2006).
“§ 658 (authorizing Secretary to issue citations for violations of occupational safety and health standards and to establish reasonable time for abatement); 29 U.S.C. § 662 (authorizing Secretary to file petition for injunctive relief to restrain imminent workplace dangers).”
Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, 445 U.S. 1 (1980).
“In the event this inspection reveals workplace conditions or practices that “could reasonably be expected to cause death or serious physical harm immediately or before the imminence of such danger can be eliminated through the enforcement procedures otherwise provided by” the…”
Marshall v. Whirlpool Corp., 593 F.2d 715 (6th Cir. 1979).
· cites it 3× “29 U.S.C. § 662 (a), (b), (c). Employees have the right to petition a federal district court for a writ of mandamus against the Secretary if he wrongfully fails to seek injunctive relief.”
Steel Inst. of New York v. City of New York, 716 F.3d 31 (2d Cir. 2013).
“, 29 U.S.C. §§ 662 , 666. Ill The City’s crane regulations 2 are part of the Building Code and are enforced by the New York City Department of Buildings (“DOB”).”
Kerker v. Elbert, 634 N.E.2d 482 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).
“Section 662 of OSHA ( 29 U.S.C. § 662 (1988)) makes injunctive relief available to the Secretary of Labor for such violations.”
Usery v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 424 F. Supp. 753 (E.D. Mich. 1976).
· cites it 2× “See 29 U.S.C. § 662 (1970). 9 . The Secretary, of course, is limited in his manpower to enforce OSHA and must review all such requests to ensue the best utilization of his compliance officers.”
Brennan v. Buckeye Indus., Inc., 374 F. Supp. 1350 (S.D. Ga. 1974).
“§ 657 (b); (2) to enjoin imminent dangers, 29 U.S.C. § 662 ; and (3) to collect civil penalties which have been levied pursuant to final orders of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 29 U.”
— 29 U.S.C. § 662(d) — 1 case
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.