Noonan v. Fruco Const. Co.

E.D. Missouri

Noonan v. Fruco Const. Co.

50 F. Supp. 432, 1943 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2661

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri

DecidedMay 28, 1943

DocketNo. 2236

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 F. Supp. 432 (Noonan v. Fruco Const. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Noonan v. Fruco Const. Co., 50 F. Supp. 432, 1943 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2661 (E.D. Mo. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

COLLET, District Judge.

The defendant’s motion to dismiss is sustained. The action seeks recovery under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., for wages said to be due guards employed during the construction of a group of buildings in the City of St. Louis, Missouri, known collectively as the Small Arms Ammunition Plant, which buildings it is alleged were to be subsequently, after completion, used for the production and manufacture of munitions for small arms “for trade, commerce and transmission from the State of Missouri to. places outside thereof.”

I am unable to bring myself to the conclusion that a guard employed to protect the premises upon which a building is being constructed is “engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce” within the meaning of the Act in question. For that reason, in my judgment, the employees described in the complaint in this cause do not come within the purview of the Act.

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

COLLET, District Judge.

The defendant’s motion to dismiss is sustained. The action seeks recovery under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., for wages said to be due guards employed during the construction of a group of buildings in the City of St. Louis, Missouri, known collectively as the Small Arms Ammunition Plant, which buildings it is alleged were to be subsequently, after completion, used for the production and manufacture of munitions for small arms “for trade, commerce and transmission from the State of Missouri to. places outside thereof.”

I am unable to bring myself to the conclusion that a guard employed to protect the premises upon which a building is being constructed is “engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce” within the meaning of the Act in question. For that reason, in my judgment, the employees described in the complaint in this cause do not come within the purview of the Act.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 F. Supp. 432, 1943 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noonan-v-fruco-const-co-moed-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack