Darrah v. Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission
District Court, W.D. Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ELMO B. HUNTER, Senior District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff’s Complaint basically alleges that Defendant (Plaintiff’s employer) violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) by failing to pay him for time during which he was “on call.”
I. STANDARD FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) provides that summary judgment shall be rendered if the “pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Armour & Co. v. WantockSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Spencer v. Hyde CountyDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1997
- Brekke v. City of BlackduckDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1997
- Dagan v. Jewish Community Housing for ElderlyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Marti v. Grey Eagle Distributors, Inc.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1996
- Dickhaut v. MADISON COUNTY, IOWADistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 2009