Legal Opinion
Culver v. Bell & Loffland, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 5, 1944No. 10786PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HEALY, Circuit Judge.
On April 29, 1942 appellants commenced suit to recover overtime wages and liquidated damages as provided in § 16 of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216. The court, for reasons shortly to appear, limited recovery to overtime only, restricted the overtime recovery to certain activities, and denied in toto the claims of other employees sought to be recovered by appellants in a representative capacity.
Appellee has for many years been engaged in the drilling of oil wells in California under contracts with producing companies. After October 27, 1940 it paid overtime…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. MisselSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Huntington v. AttrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Michelsen v. PenneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- D. A. Schulte, Inc. v. GangiSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Russell M. Smith v. John J. Cremins, Jr., John F. Mahon, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
- Minnesota v. United States Steel Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1968
- John R. Stone v. The Travelers CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Gilberto Rivera, Nicholas Alberto, Luis Navarro, Jose Garcia, Hector Garcia, Pablo Galindo, Socorro Mendivil, Rogelio Casares v. Joe AnayaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.