MATTER OF NEW YORK STATE COALITION OF PUB. EMPLOYERS v. New York State Dep't of Labor
Cases that cite this one
25 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Attco Metals Industries, Inc. (New York County Courts 1984)
- People v. Harris Corp. (New York County Courts 1984)
- City of New York v. Commissioner of Labor (New York Supreme Court 2011)
- Abdil v. Martinez (New York Supreme Court 2002)
- People v. Roth (New York County Courts 1985)
- Matter of Vaughan v. New York State Dept. of Transp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- Plainview-Old Bethpage Congress of Teachers v. New York State Health Insurance Plan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Plainview-Old Bethpage Congress of Teachers v. New York State Health Insurance Plan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- City of New York v. Commissioner of Labor (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- City of New York v. Commissioner of Labor (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Goldstein v. State (New York Supreme Court 2001)
- New York City Transit Authority v. New York State Department of Labor (N.Y. 1996)
- New York City Transit Authority v. New York State Department of Labor (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- Pastore v. Sabol (New York Supreme Court 1994)
- Warren & Washington Industrial Development Agency v. Village of Hudson Falls Board of Health (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- People v. Scantlebury (Nassau County District Court 1989)
- Sound Distributing Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority (New York Supreme Court 1989)
- People v. SNR Delivery, Inc. (Suffolk County District Court 1987)
- Council for Owner Occupied Housing, Inc. v. Abrams (New York Supreme Court 1986)
- People v. Kavanaugh (Suffolk County District Court 1986)
- Jones v. Smith (N.Y. 1985)
- American Ass'n of Bioanalysts v. Axelrod (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Sigety v. Axelrod (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- New York State Inspection, Security & Law Enforcement Employees, District Council 82 v. New York State Industrial Board of Appeals (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- People v. Harris Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
Section 27-a (subd 4, par a) of the Labor Law directed the Industrial (now Labor) Commissioner to adopt by rule all safety and health standards promulgated under the United States Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) which were in effect on December 27, 1980. Pursuant to this direction, the commissioner promulgated and published in the State Register a proposed rule which simply “incorporated by reference” all of the standards in 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926. (12 NYCRR 800.3.)
*791 In this article 78 proceeding respondents contend that such incorporation by reference violates section 8 of article IV of the New York Constitution, which provides: “No rule or regulation made by any state department * * * [or] officer * * * shall be effective until it is filed in the office of the department of state. The legislature shall provide for the speedy publication of such rules and regulations, by appropriate laws.” The Appellate Division and Special Term have held that this section forbids wholesale incorporation by reference of the OSHA regulations. We agree.
One of the purposes behind section 8 of article IV was to insure the existence of a common and definite place where the exact content of rules and regulations, including any changes, might be found. (People v Cull, 10 NY2d 123, 128.) Apart from contravening this purpose, the rule proposed by the commissioner violates the plain language of section 8, which requires all rules and regulations to be “filed in the office of the department of state” before they become effective. The OSHA regulations have not been filed.
Respondents also argue that the rule is void for vagueness because (1) it fails to specify which of the OSHA regulations were “standards” as opposed to record-keeping requirements; (2) it fails to specify which of the regulations were in effect on December 27, 1980; and (3) it adopts certain standards which are not applicable to the public sector. At such time as appellant complies with the requirement of filing and publishing the regulations, there will be no ambiguity concerning which standards are to apply in New York. Nor can we assume that appellant will choose to include regulations which have no applicability to the public sector. Consequently, it would be premature to pass on the argument that such inclusion would be void. Similarly, given our decision today, it would be pointless to pass on respondents’ contention that the procedure adopted by the commissioner deprived them of their rights under the State Administrative Procedure Act to comment on the proposed regulations.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.
*792 Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.