MacDonald v. Martinelli

S.D. New York

MacDonald v. Martinelli

120 F. Supp. 383, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1887

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedMay 23, 1950

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 120 F. Supp. 383 (MacDonald v. Martinelli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

MacDonald v. Martinelli, 120 F. Supp. 383, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1887 (S.D.N.Y. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

S. H. KAUFMAN, District Judge.

This action is brought by seven named individual employees in their individual capacity and for their own individual benefit respectively. It is not brought for and in behalf of other employees similarly situated. Under these circumstances, the provisions of § 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b), relating to the filing of consents, are inapplicable.

Motions denied.

Settle order on notice.

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

S. H. KAUFMAN, District Judge.

This action is brought by seven named individual employees in their individual capacity and for their own individual benefit respectively. It is not brought for and in behalf of other employees similarly situated. Under these circumstances, the provisions of § 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b), relating to the filing of consents, are inapplicable.

Motions denied.

Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 F. Supp. 383, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macdonald-v-martinelli-nysd-1950.

Opinion

S. H. KAUFMAN, District Judge.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack