Legal Opinion
Fineshewitz v. East River Savings Bank
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided May 16, 1946PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKeller, J.
Motion of certain employees not now parties to be allowed to intervene as additional parties plaintiff, and the application to add an additional defendant, is granted. It is the intent of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 201 et seq.) that all employees, if possible, join in one action. The act specifically so provides and it provides for the bringing of representative suits (Act, § 16, subd. [b]; IT. S. Code, tit. 29, § 216, subd. [b]), though the action is probably not a true “ class ” suit. The defendant seems apprehensive that joinder of new plaintiffs at this…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pentland v. Dravo CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945
- Simmons v. Rudolph Knitting Mills, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
- Robertson v. Alaska Juneau Gold Mining Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1945
- Morasse v. Gladiton Realty Corp.City of New York Municipal Court · 1946
- Slavin v. Trachtenberg, New York County Courts1943
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. General Electric Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Smith v. Cudahy Packing Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1947
- Barb v. Manhattan Laundries, Inc.City of New York Municipal Court · 1946