Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Furman Beauty Supply, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 14, 1961No. Civ. A. No. 6756PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

FOLLMER, District Judge.

Plaintiff alleges that the defendant, Furman Beauty Supply, Inc., was engaged in interstate commerce and in the production of goods for interstate commerce and had employed some of its employees for work weeks longer than forty hours, without compensating them at rates not less than one and one-half the regular rate at which they were employed for employment in excess of forty hours. Accordingly, plaintiff seeks to enjoin the defendant from violating the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq.)

We need not consider…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Arnold v. Ben Kanowsky, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Haynie v. Hogue Lumber & Supply Co. of Gulfport, Inc.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1951

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Arthur J. Goldberg, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Furman Beauty Supply, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API