Rodriguez v. Gerontas Compania De Navegacion

256 F.2d 582
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided June 25, 1958·No. No. 362, Docket 24720·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On both the appeal and the cross-appeal we affirm on Judge Dawson’s opinion below, reported at 150 F.Supp. 715, with the following correction as to one minor point raised by the respondent’s appeal.

On the subject of vacation pay, counsel stipulated that if any vacation pay was recoverable under the applicable law the proper measure was one day of pay for every thirty days worked. On this basis libelant computed that $153.53 was due. Judge Dawson found that there was money due for vacation pay and accepted libelant’s figure as the proper amount. However, in discussing the subject of vacation pay, Judge Dawson inadvertently cited as authority an obsolete section of the Panamanian Labor Code, Article 170, which provided for vacation pay at the rate of one day’s pay for each eleven days worked. It is quite clear that the figure awarded is correct: only the citation of Article 170 was incorrect.

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

Rodriguez v. Gerontas Compania De Navegacion, 256 F.2d 582 (2d Cir. 1958).

256 F.2d 582 (Rodriguez v. Gerontas Compania De Navegacion) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Condron v. Harl
374 P.2d 613 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1962)
Rodriguez v. Gerontas Compania De Navegacion
256 F.2d 582 (Second Circuit, 1958)