Rienzo v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.

183 Misc. 153, 53 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2794
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJune 26, 1944
StatusPublished

This text of 183 Misc. 153 (Rienzo v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.) 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
Rienzo v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co., 183 Misc. 153, 53 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2794 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1944).

Opinion

Church, J.

In this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (U. S. Code, tit. 29', § 201 et seq.) for alleged overtime and liquidated damages, tried without a jury, the parties waived the provisions of sections 439 and 440 of the Civil Practice Act.

The plaintiffs have the burden of proving that in the performance of their work as operators of passenger elevators in the [154]*154loft building for which they were employed by the defendants, they were engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for interstate commerce during the period of asserted overtime employment and the amount of such asserted overtime. (Warren-Bradshaw Co. v. Hall, 317 U. S. 88; Stoike v. First National Bank, 290 N. Y. 195; McLeod v. Threlkeld, 319 U. S. 491.)

The plaintiffs established by the evidence that the tenants in the loft building owned and operated by the defendants were engaged in the production of goods for interstate commerce; that the plaintiffs operated passenger elevators which carried employees, customers, buyers, salesmen, visitors and parcel post and express packages of the tenants, and therefore the plaintiffs were under subdivision (j) of section 3 of the Act (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 203, subd. [j]) deemed to have been engaged in the production of goods because such employees were engaged in a process or occupation necessary to the production of goods for commerce. Under section 6 of the Act an employer must pay prescribed minimum wages “ to each of his employees who is engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce and under section 7 overtime compensation must be given “ any of his employees who is engaged in commerce or in the produetion of goods for commerce ” (U. S. Code, tit. 29, §§ 206, 207). The employees engaged in the operation of a loft building in which large quantities of goods for interstate commerce are produced, there being no requirement in the Act that employees must themselves participate in the physical process of the making of the goods before they can be regarded as engaged in their production, are so engaged in production, and to the extent that the employees are engaged in commerce or in the produetion of goods for commerce the employer is himself so engaged. (Kirschbaum Co. v. Walling, 316 U. S. 517.)

Judgment is directed against the defendants in favor of James Rienzo, Sr., in the sum of $797.29 for overtime and $797.29 for statutory liquidated damages and he is allowed Ms counsel fees in the sum of $325; in favor of James Rienzo, Jr., in the sum of $705.63 for overtime and $705.63 for statutory liquidated damages and counsel fees in the sum of $290; and in favor of Donald Ferguson for the sum of $83.25 for overtime and $83.25 for statutory liquidated damages and his counsel fees in the sum of $25; each with costs and disbursements.

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

Related

A. B. Kirschbaum Co. v. Walling
316 U.S. 517 (Supreme Court, 1942)
Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. Hall
317 U.S. 88 (Supreme Court, 1942)
McLeod v. Threlkeld
319 U.S. 491 (Supreme Court, 1943)
Stoike v. First National Bank
48 N.E.2d 482 (New York Court of Appeals, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
183 Misc. 153, 53 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rienzo-v-city-bank-farmers-trust-co-nysupct-1944.