Legal Opinion
Chepard v. May
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 27, 1947PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CONGER, District Judge.
These are cross-motions for summary judgment on an agreed statement of facts.
This action has been brought by the plaintiffs under section 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b), to recover unpaid overtime compensation and liquidated damages together with a reasonable attorney’s fee.
The plaintiffs are engineers who were employed by the defendants under written agreements setting forth in detail the conditions of employment and the rates of compensation. It is agreed that they were engaged in interstate commerce within the meaning of the Act.
Th…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad v. Muscoda Local No. 123Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Addison v. Holly Hill Fruit Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Louisville Gas & Electric Co. v. ColemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- William R. Ballou v. General Electric CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1968
- Andrews v. LathropSupreme Court of Vermont · 1974
- Tripp v. MayCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951
- Boll v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. LouisDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1973
- Retail Store Employees Union, Local 400 v. Drug Fair-Community Drug Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1969
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.