O'Neil v. Brooklyn Savings Bank

56 N.E.2d 259, 293 N.Y. 666, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2090
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 14, 1944
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 56 N.E.2d 259 (O'Neil v. Brooklyn Savings Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
O'Neil v. Brooklyn Savings Bank, 56 N.E.2d 259, 293 N.Y. 666, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2090 (N.Y. 1944).

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs, without prejudice to an application in the trial court for reasonable attorney’s fee for services rendered upon an appeal.

We do not pass on the question whether the counsel fee heretofore granted is subject to increase for services rendered upon an appeal.

Two questions involving the construction of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and a question under the Federal Constitution were duly presented and necessarily passed upon by this court. The defendant contended:

1. That an action may not be maintained under section (b) of the Act by an employee solely for the recovery of liquidated damages when it is admitted that all overtime compensation was voluntarily paid in full by the employer prior to the institution of suit.

*668 2. That the release of all further claims and damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act executed by the employee and delivered to his employer at the time he received payment of all overtime compensation due him under the Act is a good defense to an action subsequently brought by such employee solely to recover liquidated damages.

3. That the imposition of liquidated damages deprives an employer of property without due process of law in violation of' the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

This court held against the defendant on each of these three contentions and unanimously affirmed a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacher, JJ. Rippey, J., taking no part.

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

Related

PAK Realty Associates v. RE/MAX Universal, Inc.
157 Misc. 2d 985 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1993)
Snowpine Village Condominium Board of Managers v. Town of Great Valley
144 Misc. 2d 1049 (New York Supreme Court, 1989)
People v. Isaacs
139 Misc. 2d 323 (New York County Courts, 1988)
950 Third Ave Co. v. Eastland Industries, Inc.
119 Misc. 2d 19 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1983)
Norms Realty Corp. v. Rodriguez
108 Misc. 2d 124 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1981)
Bess v. Toia
66 A.D.2d 844 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Garrity v. Lyle Stuart, Inc.
353 N.E.2d 793 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Menasche v. Interoceanic Commodities Corp.
6 A.D.2d 421 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1958)
Estro Chemical Co. v. Falk
100 N.E.2d 146 (New York Court of Appeals, 1951)
Phelan v. Carstens, Linnekin & Wilson
187 Misc. 352 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1946)
Asselta v. 149 Madison Avenue Corp.
65 F. Supp. 385 (S.D. New York, 1945)
Easley v. Edgord Realty Corp.
270 A.D. 184 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1945)
Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'Neil
324 U.S. 697 (Supreme Court, 1945)
Cangemi v. Cuttner Fur Blending Corp.
269 A.D. 688 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1945)
Fleming v. Post
146 F.2d 441 (Second Circuit, 1944)
Anderson v. New York Savings Bank
182 Misc. 945 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1944)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 N.E.2d 259, 293 N.Y. 666, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2090, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneil-v-brooklyn-savings-bank-ny-1944.