1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 74 F.Supp.
  5. 74 F.Supp. 41 (1947)
 

BARTELS v. PIEL BROS.

Civil Action No. 7540.

74 F.Supp. 41 (1947)

BARTELS et al. v. PIEL BROS., Inc.

District Court, E. D. New York.

September 8, 1947.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Witt & Cammer, of New York City, (Milton Paulson, of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff, for the motion.

Sullivan & Cromwell, of New York City (John F. Dooling, Jr., of New York City, of counsel), for defendant, opposed.

KENNEDY, District Judge.

In this and 15 other cases, plaintiffs move to amend their complaint. All of the suits were instituted under the supposed authority of Sec. 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b), that is to say the plaintiffs were not suing in the capacity of employees of the defendant; they were union agents suing in a representative capacity. These agent-plaintiffs had, and exhibited as part of their complaints, authority...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases