Legal Opinion
MATTER OF HULL-HAZARD, INC. v. Roberts
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 15, 1989PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The judgment of the Appellate Division should be modified by reversing so much thereof as annulled respondent’s determination of willfulness and, as so modified, affirmed.
The overtime pay policy of petitioner Hull Corporation (Hull) is identical to that policy previously ruled unlawful by respondent Commissioner of Labor in another administrative proceeding to which Hull was a party (see, Matter of Hull-Hazard, Inc. v Roberts, 72 NY2d 900, affg for the reasons stated below 129 AD2d 348 [Hull-Hazard I]). Thus, Hull cannot claim it was ignorant of the agency’s…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re the Claim of ValvoNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Hull-Hazard, Inc. v. RobertsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Old Republic Life Insurance v. ThacherNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
- Hull-Hazard, Inc. v. RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sarco Industries v. AngelloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Tap Electrical Contracting Service, Inc. v. HartnettNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- L & M Co. v. New York State Department of LaborAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Hull Corp. v. HartnettNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Waterway Construction Corp. v. SweeneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.