Frost-Arnett Company v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor

264 F.2d 246, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4938, 36 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 65,282
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided February 23, 1959·No. 13616_1·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case has been heard and considered upon the oral arguments and printed briefs, with appendices, of the attorneys for the contending parties and upon the record in the ease;

And it appearing that the findings of fact of the district court are supported by substantial evidence and are not clearly erroneous and that the conclusions of .law of District Judge Boyd are correctly drawn;

The order of the district court is affirmed, wherein it is directed that, in order to purge itself of contempt, the *247 respondent-appellant pay to the petitioner-appellee the sum of $20,309.14, being the amount equal to that for overtime compensation due the named employees of the respondent-appellant;

And the further order of the court is affirmed, wherein it is directed that the appellant pay to the appellee a compensatory fine of $2,141, to reimburse the petitioner-appellee in part for his reasonable costs and necessary expenses in the investigation of respondent-appellant’s operations and in the prosecution of this civil contempt action.

The order of the district court is in all things affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Frost-Arnett Company v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor, 264 F.2d 246, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4938, 36 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 65,282 (6th Cir. 1959).

264 F.2d 246 (Frost-Arnett Company v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Donovan v. Sureway Cleaners
656 F.2d 1368 (Ninth Circuit, 1981)
Wirtz v. Compania de Servicios Electricos, S.A.
304 F. Supp. 697 (District Court, Canal Zone, 1967)
Wirtz v. Ocala Gas Company
336 F.2d 236 (Fifth Circuit, 1964)
Wirtz v. Ocala Gas Co.
336 F.2d 236 (Fifth Circuit, 1964)