Legal Opinion

Compton v. Union Supply Co.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 25, 1953No. Civ. A. 9471PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEWART,. District Judge.

Plaintiffs brought this action under the Fair Labor" Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., "to recover overtime compensation and ' penalties allegedly "due-them from defendant. Subsequently, defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that:(1) The complaint fails to state facts sufficient to show jurisdiction of this court in the matter; and

• ,(2) The complaint fails" to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. while a complaint must set forth' a basis for jurisdiction, it…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Frederick Hart & Co. v. Recordgraph CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
  3. Continental Collieries, Inc. v. ShoberCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
  4. Shapiro v. Royal Indemnity Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1951

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dovberg v. Dow Chemical Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
  2. United States v. GreitzerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1955
  3. Dovberg v. Dow Chemical CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API