Janik Paving & Construction, Inc. v. Brock
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
828 F.2d 84 (1987)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Janik Paving & Construction, Inc. (Janik) (plaintiff) entered into two federally funded government construction contracts. Both contracts included a Davis-Bacon provision that required Janik to pay its workers the prevailing wage in the relevant locality. Further, both contracts were subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA) which, in relevant part, required Janik to provide overtime pay. The Department of Labor (Department) (defendant) investigated Janik’s performance and determined that Janik failed to appropriately pay overtime and falsified its pay records to cover up that failure. Janik challenged the Department’s findings at an evidentiary hearing before an administrative-law judge (ALJ). At the evidentiary hearing, the Department presented evidence of Janik’s improper recordkeeping, falsified paystubs, and introduced testimony from several Janik employees that they were consistently underpaid for hours worked. The ALJ ordered Janik to pay back wages to the employees and debarred Janik from being awarded government contracts for a period of two years. Janik unsuccessfully appealed to the Department’s Wage Appeals Board, then filed an action to enjoin enforcement of the debarment in district court, arguing that (1) the Department did not have the authority to issue a debarment; and (2) there was insufficient evidence to support a debarment. The district court dismissed Janik’s action. Janik appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lumbard, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.