Legal Opinion

Carroll v. Pittsburgh Steel Co.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided October 27, 1951No. Civ. A. 8343PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEWART, District Judge.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover unpaid overtime compensation and penalties under Section 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), based upon a period of employment from July 28, 1940 to September 30, 1945. Alleging' that the plaintiff’s claim is barred by the Statute of Limitations, the defendant filed a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. The main contention of the defendant in support of its motion for summary judgment is that the complaint on its face shows that the claim…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Toebelman v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
  2. Gifford v. Travelers Protective Ass'n of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1946
  3. Reynolds v. NeedleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1942
  4. United States v. CostaDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1951
  5. Hughes v. Werner's EstateDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · 1948

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Peña v. Eastern Sugar AssociatesSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1953
  2. Carroll v. Pittsburgh Steel Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
  3. Peña v. Eastern Sugar AssociatesSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API