Legal Opinion

Bayer v. Courtemanche

District Court, D. Connecticut

Decided December 24, 1947No. Civil Action No. 1840PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, District Judge.

Plaintiff was employed by an independent contractor furnishing cafeteria services to production workers in a manufacturing plant engaged in the production of goods for commerce.

Plaintiff was employed for more than forty hours per week on a straight-time, weekly basis, with no provision for payment of one and one-half times the hourly rate for hours worked in excess of forty.

If plaintiff’s employment was in an occupation “necessary to the production of goods for commerce,” he may recover, for he was not paid in accordance with the requirements of the Act.1 Act of June 25,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. McLeod v. ThrelkeldSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. D. A. Schulte, Inc. v. GangiSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. Roland Electrical Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  5. 10 East 40th Street Building, Inc. v. CallusSupreme Court of the United States · 1945

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Waialua Agr. Co. v. ManejaDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1951
  2. Hawkins v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1951
  3. Tipton v. Bearl Sprott Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API