Skip to main content

Roberts Sand Company, LLLP v. Secretary of Labor

11th CircuitJune 9, 2014No. 13-11478Cited 3 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Pryor, Fay, Cox
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unpublished
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the OSHA citation against Roberts Sand Company, finding substantial evidence that the employer violated the general duty clause by failing to adopt feasible abatement measures (sloping excavation walls) to prevent a hazard that caused an employee injury from falling clay.

What This Ruling Means

# Roberts Sand Company v. Secretary of Labor **What Happened** An employee at Roberts Sand Company was injured when clay fell from an excavation wall. Federal workplace safety inspectors (OSHA) cited the company for violating safety rules by not taking reasonable steps to prevent this type of hazard. **The Court's Decision** The appeals court sided with the government. The court found solid evidence that Roberts Sand Company failed to implement a simple safety measure—sloping the excavation walls at a safer angle—that could have prevented the injury. The company had to accept this safety citation. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces that employers must take practical, achievable steps to protect workers from known hazards. Companies cannot ignore safety problems just because fixes exist. If workers are injured due to preventable hazards, regulators can hold employers accountable. The decision strengthens worker protections in construction and excavation work, industries where injuries are common.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.