Tankard v. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor

215 F.2d 101, 26 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 68,627
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 11, 1954·No. 13766_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The ultimate question on this appeal is whether Tankard’s employees come within Section 16(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, c. 676, 52 Stat. 1060, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq., as amended in 1949 by c. 736, 63 Stat. 910, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq. as to payment for overtime. That question turns upon whether Tankard knew or in reason should have known that a substantial quantity of scrap metal and paper sold by Tankard locally was purchased for and was shipped in interstate commerce. Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. Hall, 317 U.S. 88, 63 S.Ct. 125, 87 L.Ed. 83; Culver v. Bell & Loffland, 9 Cir., 146 F.2d 29.

There is ample evidence in the record to support the trial court’s finding in the affirmative on the latter question.

Affirmed.

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

Tankard v. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor, 215 F.2d 101, 26 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 68,627 (9th Cir. 1954).

215 F.2d 101 (Tankard v. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. Hall
317 U.S. 88 (Supreme Court, 1942)
Culver v. Bell & Loffland, Inc.
146 F.2d 29 (Ninth Circuit, 1944)