Legal Opinion

Haddad v. Beckerman Shoe Corp.

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County

Decided May 5, 1941No. 181Published

1Opinion of the Court

Shanaman, J.,

This was assumpsit under the Fair Labor Standards Act of June 25,1938, 52 Stat. at L. 1069, to recover pay and penalties for overtime. Plaintiff recovered a verdict and defendant has taken rules for judgment n. o. v. and for new trial.

Defendant’s first reason for judgment n. o. v. is that a State court has no jurisdiction of a suit brought under this act, for the reason that it is a suit for a penalty. By section 256 of the Judicial Code of the United States, 28 U. S. C. §371, it is provided that the jurisdiction vested in the courts of the United States shall be exclusive of the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. American Trucking AssociationsSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Forsyth v. Central Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1940
  4. Hart v. GregorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Emerson v. Mary Lincoln Candies, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1940

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API