Legal Opinion
Norton v. Worthen Van Service, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided February 17, 1988No. 86-1415PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHN P. MOORE, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ claim for back wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219 (FLSA). Plaintiffs Floyd Norton, Robert Remmick, *654and Steve Neiffer, argue on behalf of fifty-two current and former Worthen Van employees that the district court incorrectly decided time spent waiting on call did not constitute working time under the FLSA. Plaintiffs contend that waiting to be called was an integral part of their job because during this period they had to be immediately available to work and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Armour & Co. v. WantockSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Handler v. ThrasherCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951
- Pilkenton v. Appalachian Regional Hospitals, Inc.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 1971
- Kelly v. BallardDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1969
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Marshall Martin, Jr., on Behalf of Himself and All Other Employees of the Ohio Turnpike Commission Similarly Situated v. Ohio Turnpike CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992
- Frederick George Bright v. Houston Northwest Medical Center Survivor, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
- Renfro v. City of EmporiaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Lamon v. City Of ShawneeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Lamon v. City of ShawneeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.