Legal Opinion

Williams v. Strickland

District Court, N.D. California

Decided November 10, 1993No. C-91-3949-CALPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

LEGGE, District Judge.

I

This action is brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. Plaintiff alleges that he was an “employee” within the meaning of the FLSA during his tenure with the defendant Salvation Army, and that defendant did not pay him the minimum wage mandated by the FLSA. Defendant contends that plaintiff was not an “employee” of defendant under the FLSA, but was a beneficiary of its rehabilitation services.

Defendant and plaintiff cross-moved for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of LaborSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Walling v. Portland Terminal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Hale v. ArizonaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
  4. Bonnette v. California Health And Welfare AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
  5. Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. American Airlines, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Williams v. StricklandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
  2. Johnson v. Salvation ArmyAppellate Court of Illinois · 2011
  3. Murray v. R.E.A.C.H. of Jackson County, Inc.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1995
  4. Williams v. StricklandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API