Legal Opinion
Borella v. Borden Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 7, 1943PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CONGER, District Judge.
The plaintiffs bring this action, which was tried before the court without a jury, on their own behalf and on behalf of other employees of the defendant similarly situated. The action against the defendant is brought to recover overtime compensation and an equal amount as liquidated damages plus a reasonable attorney’s fee pursuant to section 16 (b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216 (b).
Jurisdiction is conferred upon this court by virtue of Section 24 (8) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C.A. § 41 (8).
There are no facts in dispute.
The defendant is a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- McLeod v. ThrelkeldSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Stoike v. First National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- Johnson v. Dallas Downtown Development Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1942
- Callus v. 10 East Fortieth Street Bldg., Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1943
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Borden Co. v. BorellaSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Borden Co. v. BorellaSupreme Court of the United States · 1945