Phillips v. Star Overall Dry Cleaning Laundry Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CHASE, Circuit Judge.
As Star was not the employer of the plaintiffs, it is clear that the complaint was properly dismissed as to it and no one now disputes that.
It should be noted at the outset that the plaintiffs were not engaged in interstate commerce simply because they performed part of the work involved in washing or otherwise cleaning and making ready for delivery to Star garments which Star later returned to its interstate customers as and when it saw fit to do so. Whether an employee is engaged in interstate commerce for the purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act depends not upon…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'NeilSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- United States v. DarbySupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Walling v. Jacksonville Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- A. H. Phillips, Inc. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Crabb v. Welden Bros.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1947
- Walling v. Connecticut Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Walling v. Comet Carriers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Roberg v. Henry Phipps EstateCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Wirtz v. Soft Drinks of Shreveport, Inc.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1971
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.