Legal Opinion

Fajack v. Cleveland Graphite Bronze Co.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided July 23, 1947No. Civil Action No. 24490PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JONES, District Judge.

The basis for the liability sought to be imposed in this case as laid does not conform to the requirements of the so-called Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, approved May 14, 1947, 29 U.S.C.A. § 251 et seq. The complaint, therefore, will be dismissed without prejudice.

If the plaintiffs are able to bring an action alleging essential facts respecting unpaid overtime and for valid compensable time as is required by the new Act, the opportunity is not foreclosed.

If, as is suggested, the constitutionality of the statute is to be put in issue it would be far better to have such…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Seese v. Bethlehem Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1948
  2. Seese v. Bethlehem Steel Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1947
  3. Bartels v. Sperti, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1947
  4. Johnson v. Park City Consol. Mines Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1947
  5. Ackerman v. J. I. Case Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1947

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

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

Powered by the Exa API