Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Federal Cartridge Corporation
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided June 11, 1945No. Civil Action 1109PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOYCE, District Judge.
This is an action by Frode Anderson and eleven other plaintiffs for recovery of varying amounts of overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney’s fees and costs, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 52 Stat. 1060, 1063, 29 U.S. C.A. §§ 201-219. The action is in the nature of a class suit in which there are some 164 individual plaintiffs, employees and former employees of defendant, but pursuant to an order of the court plaintiffs’ counsel has selected these twelve individual plaintiffs for trial. The remainder will be held until the determination here.
Defend…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. MisselSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Helliwell v. HabermanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Smith v. PorterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1944
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Burger King CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1982
- Glynn Douglas, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Argo-Tech Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/ Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
- American Automobile Insurance v. MollingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Koenigs v. TravisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
- Piñán v. Mayagüez Sugar Co.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1961
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.