824 F.2d 634 (8th Cir. 1987), 86-1623, Donovan v. Trinity Industries, Inc.

Docket Nº:86-1623.
Citation:824 F.2d 634
Party Name:Raymond J. DONOVAN, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellee, v. TRINITY INDUSTRIES, INC., a Texas Corporation doing business in Crittenden County, Arkansas, as Hackney, Inc., and John Brooks, Appellants. Raymond J. DONOVAN, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellee, v. TRINITY INDUSTRIES, INC., a Texas
Case Date:July 22, 1987
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 634

824 F.2d 634 (8th Cir. 1987)

Raymond J. DONOVAN, Secretary of Labor, United States

Department of Labor, Appellee,

v.

TRINITY INDUSTRIES, INC., a Texas Corporation doing business

in Crittenden County, Arkansas, as Hackney, Inc.,

and John Brooks, Appellants.

Raymond J. DONOVAN, Secretary of Labor, United States

Department of Labor, Appellee,

v.

TRINITY INDUSTRIES, INC., a Texas Corporation doing business

in Crittenden County, Arkansas, as Hackney, Inc.,

and Donald Stephens, Appellants.

No. 86-1623.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

July 22, 1987

Submitted Feb. 12, 1987.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied Sept. 24, 1987.

Robert E. Rader, Jr., Dallas, Tex., for appellants.

Andrea C. Casson, Washington, D.C., for appellee.

Before HEANEY, McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

Page 635

HEANEY, Circuit Judge.

In 1983, a federal magistrate issued the Secretary of Labor two warrants, one authorizing a health inspection and the other a safety inspection of Trinity Industries, Inc.'s, Crittenden County, Arkansas, pipe fabricating plant for possible violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. Secs. 651-678. Trinity refused to permit both inspections. The Secretary petitioned the district court to hold Trinity, plant manager John Brooks, and office manager Donald Stephens in civil contempt for failing to honor the warrants. In the contempt proceeding, Trinity filed a counterclaim for a declaratory judgment that both warrants were invalid because the Secretary had not established probable cause and because the administrative plan for scheduling health and safety inspections was invalid. Trinity attempted to discover information concerning the formulation and operation of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration's (OSHA) safety and health inspection programs as well as the inspection of Trinity pursuant to those programs. The district court dismissed Trinity's counterclaim, upheld the validity of the warrants, held Trinity, Brooks, and Stephens in civil contempt, and ordered Trinity to pay a civil fine of $1,000 per day as of May 1, 1986. The district court stayed judgment pending appeal.

In this appeal, appellants claim: 1) the Secretary did not establish probable cause to justify issuance of the warrants; 2) the district court erred in not permitting discovery into the plan; and 3) the district court erred in holding Brooks and Stephens in contempt. The Secretary asserts that Trinity is collaterally estopped from litigating the issue of whether it is entitled to a declaratory judgment and discovery because it previously unsuccessfully litigated the same issue in two other Circuit Courts. See Donovan v. Mosher Steel Company, 791 F.2d 1535 (11th Cir.1986), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 107 S.Ct. 874, 93 L.Ed.2d 829 (1987); Donovan v. Hackney, Inc., 769 F.2d 650 (10th Cir.1985), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 106 S.Ct. 1458, 89 L.Ed.2d 715 (1986). Without deciding the collateral estoppel question, we affirm.

I

The first question is whether the United States Magistrate acted on probable cause in issuing the warrants authorizing the health and safety inspections of the Trinity plant.

The starting point for any discussion of probable cause for an administrative search is Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. 307...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP