Opinion

Building & Construction Trades Department v. Brock

  • 838 F.2d 1258
  • 267 U.S. App. D.C. 308
Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Filed
Feb 2, 1988
Status
Published
Author
Weigel
On the bench
Buckley, California, Northern, Weigel, Williams
Cited by
3 cases

The opinion

WEIGEL, Senior District Judge,

dissenting in part:

I respectfully dissent only from that portion of the opinion which fails to call for medical surveillance for employees in the construction industry to the same extent required for those in general industry. The record makes it clear that even if exposure to asbestos for 30 days or less in a single year is not dangerous to health, there is such danger from exposure to large quantities over an extended period of years. Since nothing in the record suggests that the relevant standard for construction workers should be different from those in general industry, I would require OSHA to reconsider its decision on this matter.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.