Legal Opinion

Paulina Castillo v. Ercell Givens

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided May 6, 1983No. 81-1520PublishedCited by 112 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*183JOHNSON, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiffs, thirty-nine Mexican and Mexican-American migrant farm laborers who chopped cotton in defendant’s fields during the summers of 1977 and 1978, brought this action under section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for unpaid minimum wages and liquidated damages and under section 2050a of the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act (FLCRA) for liquidated damages. The district court entered judgment for defendant on both claims, based on the jury’s answers to nine special issues. Plaintiffs appeal from the court’s denial of their motions for judgment…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. National Labor Relations Board v. Hearst Publications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Leedom v. KyneSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Rutherford Food Corp. v. McCombSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  5. United States v. SilkSupreme Court of the United States · 1947

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

3Cited by112 opinions

  1. McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Marilyn Wheeler v. Main HurdmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
  3. Brock v. Superior Care, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1988
  4. Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, and 177 Named Employees v. Grim Hotel Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
  5. Sendhabhai Patel v. Dr. Alex Wargo, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1986

107 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