Legal Opinion
Burrell v. La Follette Coach Lines
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided April 19, 1951No. 1018PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROBERT L. TAYLOR, District Judge.
Defendants have moved for a dismissal of the action on the ground that it is barred by the provisions of Sections 255 and 256, Title 29 U.S.C.A., of the Portal-to-Portal Act.
The original complaint was filed on behalf of 32 named plaintiffs “and all other persons and employees of defendant who are or were similarly situated.” The complaint was signed by attorneys for the plaintiffs and sworn to by Albert Burrell, one of the named plaintiffs. An amended complaint has been signed by an attorney for the plaintiffs and sworn to by the same attorney.
The action was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Berry v. Chrysler CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1945
- Clougherty v. James Vernor Co. James Vernor Co. v. CloughertyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1951
- Drabkin v. Gibbs & Hill, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1947
3Cited by16 opinions
- Soler v. G & U, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1980
- Chambliss v. Coca-Cola Bottling CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1967
- Hankinson v. Pennsylvania Railroad CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1958
- Choate v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 1967
- Mateo v. Auto Rental Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.