Legal Opinion

Hoy v. Progress Pattern Co.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided November 5, 1953No. Civ. A. No. 12846PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THORNTON, District Judge.

Plaintiffs herein seek overtime compensation and liquidated damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, Section 16(b), 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b). Defendant, in filing its motion to dismiss, contends that this Court lacks jurisdiction for the reason that plaintiffs were not employees within the meaning and coverage of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The motion to dismiss was addressed to the original complaint filed by the plaintiff Hoy, but, by stipulation between the parties, is to be considered *372as addressed to the amended complaint in which Schuster was added as a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'NeilSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Fleming v. Demeritt Co.District Court, D. Vermont · 1944

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Harry Hoy and Michael R. Schuster v. Progress Pattern CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1954
  2. Eisert v. Urick Foundry Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API