Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

American Dental Association v. Martin

984 F.2d 823 (1993)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

American Dental Association v. Martin

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

984 F.2d 823 (1993)

Facts

Due in part to growing public concern over the spread of HIV, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (defendant) proposed a rule to limit healthcare workers’ exposure to bloodborne pathogens, primarily HIV and Hepatitis B, while at work. OSHA had found that two or three healthcare workers contracted HIV from work each year, for a total of 24 United States workers in the previous 10 years. OSHA had also found that many healthcare workers did not get vaccinated against Hepatitis B, approximately 20,000 healthcare workers contracted Hepatitis B from work each year, and about 200 of those workers died each year. OSHA noted that some workers became Hepatitis B carriers and then infected people outside the workplace. The proposed rule included requirements for work-area safety, types of personal protective gear, work practices, and cleaning procedures. The proposed rule also required healthcare employers to offer the Hepatitis B vaccine to their employees for free. Most of the rule’s proposed requirements were already recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). OSHA estimated it would cost the healthcare industry $813 million to implement the rule. After accepting public comments, OSHA enacted the rule, and numerous employers implemented it quickly. However, the American Dental Association and the Home Health Services and Staffing Association (the associations) (plaintiffs) sued, challenging the validity of the rule. The associations argued, among other things, that the rule actually cost much more than $813 million and that the increased medical costs would reduce medical access and cause some patients to lose their lives. The associations had not provided OSHA with any evidence for these arguments during the rulemaking process.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Coffey, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership