Legal Opinion
Walling v. Connecticut Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 29, 1946No. 221PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
There is little to add to what was said in the opinion below. Aside from § 13(a) (9), the employees are obviously within the Act, without regard to the percentage of power sold for use in interstate commerce. Defendant’s contention comes to this: Since it is a “local trolley carrier,” none of its employees is covered by the Act because § 13(a) (9) expressly exempts “any employee” of such a carrier. Literally, that contention is correct. But it would mean that, no matter in what business, however extraneous to its functioning as a “local trolley carrier,” defendant…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Walling v. Jacksonville Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- A. H. Phillips, Inc. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Markham v. CabellSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Mabee v. White Plains Publishing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Roland Electrical Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Gardella v. ChandlerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Gieg v. Ddr, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Hodgson v. Colonnades, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Union Pac. R. CoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- Western Union Tel. Co. v. McCombCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1947
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.