Legal Opinion
Keeley v. Loomis Fargo & Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided October 15, 1998No. Civ. 97-6207(DRD)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge.
In this action for overtime pay the plaintiffs and defendant, Loomis Fargo & Co. (“Loomis Fargo”), cross-move for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons set forth below, Loomis Fargo’s motion will be granted and the plaintiffs’ motion will be denied.
BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The plaintiffs are four New Jersey residents presently or formerly employed by Loomis Fargo or its predecessor, Wells Fargo Armored Services Corp. (‘Wells Fargo”) at its Lyndhurst, New Jersey facility. The plaintiffs are and have been employed by Loomis…
2Cases cited15 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Amerada Hess Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation, New Jersey Department of the TreasurySupreme Court of the United States · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- John Keeley Timmie Orange Ariel Kilpatrick Charles Werdann, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Loomis Fargo & CoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
- Keeley v. Loomis Fargo & CoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999