Tucker v. Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Corp.

W.D. Missouri

Tucker v. Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Corp.

77 F. Supp. 227, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2647

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri

DecidedMarch 25, 1948

DocketNo. 4465

StatusPublished

This text of 77 F. Supp. 227 (Tucker v. Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tucker v. Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Corp., 77 F. Supp. 227, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2647 (W.D. Mo. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

REEVES, District Judge.

This is an action pursuant to what may be termed the Portal-to-Portal decision in Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680, 66 S.Ct. 1187. The suit was filed on November 27, 1946. Subsequently the Congress passed the Portal-to-Portal Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 251 et seq., which was approved May 14, 1947. By this enactment suits of this sort could not be maintained in the federal court unless it appeared that the activity was compensable under an express written contract or by custom. Without such averments this court has no jurisdiction. Since no such averments are contained in the complaint, the effect of the Congressional Act was to deprive the federal court of jurisdiction in such cases.

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss should be sustained and it will be so ordered.

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

REEVES, District Judge.

This is an action pursuant to what may be termed the Portal-to-Portal decision in Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680, 66 S.Ct. 1187. The suit was filed on November 27, 1946. Subsequently the Congress passed the Portal-to-Portal Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 251 et seq., which was approved May 14, 1947. By this enactment suits of this sort could not be maintained in the federal court unless it appeared that the activity was compensable under an express written contract or by custom. Without such averments this court has no jurisdiction. Since no such averments are contained in the complaint, the effect of the Congressional Act was to deprive the federal court of jurisdiction in such cases.

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss should be sustained and it will be so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 F. Supp. 227, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-pratt-whitney-aircraft-corp-mowd-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack