Legal Opinion
Andrako v. United States Steel Corp.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided June 22, 2009No. Civil Action 07-1629PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION and ORDER OF COURT
AMBROSE, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs have brought this action against their employer under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., seeking compensation for time spent donning and doffing (i.e., putting on and taking off) certain protective gear as well as showering and walking to and from their workstations after donning and before doffing. Pending before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant United States Steel Corporation (“U.S. Steel” or “Defendant”). (Docket No. 48). Plaintiffs oppose Defendant’s motion. (Docket No.57).…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Perrin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Federal Express Corp. v. HoloweckiSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Franklin v. Kellogg Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2010
- Andrako v. United States Steel Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- Musticchi v. City of Little Rock, Ark.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2010
- Williams v. Tyson Foods, Inc.District Court, M.D. Georgia · 2010
- Harvey v. AB ElectroluxDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.