Legal Opinion

Goldberg v. Barger Construction Co.

District Court, W.D. North Carolina

Decided November 15, 1962No. Civ. No. 438PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CRAVEN, Chief Judge.

Are employees of a construction company engaged in building a new manufacturing plant in an occupation, closely related to and directly essential to the production of goods for interstate commerce ?

No talismanic or abstract tests, embodied in tags or formulae, can do service for judgment or dispense with painstaking appraisal of all the variant elements which must be considered to determine coverage under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Mitchell v. H. B. Zachry Co., 362 U.*753S. 310, 80 S.Ct. 739, 4 L.Ed.2d 753; 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq.

With the consent of the parties and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  3. Mitchell v. C. W. Vollmer & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  4. 10 East 40th Street Building, Inc. v. CallusSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  5. Mitchell v. H. B. Zachry Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. R. E. Lee Electric Company, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
  2. WIRTZ v. McDANIELCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1963
  3. Wirtz v. McDanielCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1963
  4. Wirtz v. DayDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API