Return to Browsing

11 N.J.A.R. 559

Titan Construction Company, et al.; Labor, Department of v
Formats: PDF | DjVu— Help viewing DjVu Files
Citation: 11 N.J.A.R. 559
Decision Date: 1983
Agency: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Synopsis: The Commissioner of the Department of Labor proposed to debar respondents for alleged violations of the Prevailing Wage Act. Respondents requested a hearing and the matter was transmitted to the Office of Administrative Law. Petitioner filed a motion for summary decision, arguing that a violation occurred and debarment is mandatory whenever there is a violation. The administrative law judge assigned to the case found that the Prevailing Wage Act did apply to manual work done by principals of the company performing the work and, therefore, there had been a violation of the Act. The judge also concluded that the Act requires debarment when there is a violation. Nonetheless, the Commissioner's prosecutorial discretion may be exercised in two ways. First, the Commissioner has discretion not to pursue a debarment proceeding against a contractor when the Commissioner believes debarment is not justified, such as when there is only a minor infraction of the law. Also, the Commissioner may choose to settle a debarment case prior to the rendering of a final decision. The administrative law judge granted the motion for summary judgment and issued an initial decision concluding the case. This initial decision was adopted by silence by the Commissioner of the Department of Labor. The Appellate Division affirmed the decision of the adminis- trative law judge per curJam. (A-2329-83T5, Nov. 15, 1984). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. Lewis A. Scheindlin, Deputy Attorney General, for petitioner (Irwin I. Kimmelman, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney) Thomas J. Hirsch, Esq., for respondents (Crawford and Hirsch, at- torneys)
Rule(s) Cited: 12:13-1.3 12:13-1.4 
Statute(s) Cited: 34:11-56.25 et seq. 34:11-56.37 34:11-56.38 
Citation Tracker adopted-Dept of Labor; affirmed -App. Div. A 2329-83-T3, 11/15/84 (unreported); affirmed in part, reversed in part 102 N.J. 1 (1985) [Updated through 1991]