O'Neill v. New York Board of Fire Underwriters

New York Supreme Court

O'Neill v. New York Board of Fire Underwriters

191 Misc. 485, 78 N.Y.S.2d 709, 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2304

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedApril 27, 1948

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 191 Misc. 485 (O'Neill v. New York Board of Fire Underwriters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

O'Neill v. New York Board of Fire Underwriters, 191 Misc. 485, 78 N.Y.S.2d 709, 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2304 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Miller, J.

Plaintiffs " concede that the fixing of a uniform Statute of Limitations is within the powers of Congress ” in connection with actions brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 201 et seq.) as subsequently amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 251 et seq.). They contend, however, that the provision of section 7 of the Portal-to-Portal Act that an action is deemed commenced when the complaint is filed and not otherwise is not binding upon the courts of this State, since matters of civil procedure are beyond the power or reach of Congress. With this contention this court cannot agree. Congress in creating new rights and remedies may qualify them by fixing a time within which steps must be taken to enforce or avail one’s self of such rights or remedies. Just as Congress can provide a definite period, no matter how short, within which actions have to be commenced under the above-referred to statutes, by the service of a summons, it can attain a similar result by providing that an action under said statutes will not lie unless the complaint is filed within a prescribed period. That is really all that section 7 does. Congress has merely limited the rights and remedies which it itself created to those who file their complaints in actions instituted under the aforesaid statutes within a pre[486]*486scribed time. The court is unable to follow the decision in Semar v. Great Eastern Fuel Co. (191 Misc. 552) relied upon by plaintiffs.

The motion to strike out the second and third defenses is denied.

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

Miller, J.

Plaintiffs " concede that the fixing of a uniform Statute of Limitations is within the powers of Congress ” in connection with actions brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 201 et seq.) as subsequently amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 251 et seq.). They contend, however, that the provision of section 7 of the Portal-to-Portal Act that an action is deemed commenced when the complaint is filed and not otherwise is not binding upon the courts of this State, since matters of civil procedure are beyond the power or reach of Congress. With this contention this court cannot agree. Congress in creating new rights and remedies may qualify them by fixing a time within which steps must be taken to enforce or avail one’s self of such rights or remedies. Just as Congress can provide a definite period, no matter how short, within which actions have to be commenced under the above-referred to statutes, by the service of a summons, it can attain a similar result by providing that an action under said statutes will not lie unless the complaint is filed within a prescribed period. That is really all that section 7 does. Congress has merely limited the rights and remedies which it itself created to those who file their complaints in actions instituted under the aforesaid statutes within a pre[486]*486scribed time. The court is unable to follow the decision in Semar v. Great Eastern Fuel Co. (191 Misc. 552) relied upon by plaintiffs.

The motion to strike out the second and third defenses is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 Misc. 485, 78 N.Y.S.2d 709, 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneill-v-new-york-board-of-fire-underwriters-nysupct-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack