Mills v. Joshua Hendy Corp.
MILLS v. JOSHUA HENDY CORPORATION
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- McCormick (author)
Analysis
The court considered the applicability of the Portal-to-Portal Act to a Fair Labor Standards Act overtime claim and found the Act inapplicable because the decedent performed productive services during lunch periods. The court entered judgment for the plaintiff for unpaid overtime wages, attorney's fees, and costs.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Judgment for plaintiff for unpaid overtime wages, attorney's fees, and costs“Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment for the plaintiff for $645.191 unpaid overtime wages without liquidated damages and attorney’s fees of $75 and costs are ordered.” | agree with court The court found that the plaintiff's decedent was hired to perform productive services during lunch periods and that no real lunch period was allocated. Under the FLSA, time spent performing productive work is compensable. The court correctly applied the FLSA to the facts found. The exclusion of liquidated damages is a discretionary matter often exercised by courts in FLSA cases, though the order does not state the reason for the exclusion. The calculation of the award appears to be based on the specific hours and rates found. |
Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 held inapplicable“We are of the opinion that under the concrete situation before us in this action, the provisions of the amendatory act effective May 14, 1947 are inapplicable.” | agree with court The court determined that because the employee was performing productive services during the lunch period, the time was compensable under the original FLSA. The Portal-to-Portal Act generally clarified that time spent walking or waiting is not compensable unless it is the principal activity. Since the court found the lunch time was productive work (principal activity), the Act's exclusions did not apply. This is a correct application of the law to the specific facts found. |
The order itself: sound with gaps — The order is very brief and procedural in nature, stating the conclusion and the judgment without detailed legal analysis. It does not cite any case law, only statutes. It skips the argument for why liquidated damages were excluded. However, the result is defensible based on the facts stated (productive work during lunch).
Opinion — McCormick
McCORMICK, District Judge.
We have given deliberate consideration to the applicability of Section 2(d) of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C.A. g 252(d), to this action and to the evidence in the record before us in this action.
We are of the opinion that under the concrete situation before us in this action, the provisions of the amendatory act effective May 14, 1947 are inapplicable.
We find that, plaintiff’s decedent under unrepealed and effective terms of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., was actually hired to, and did, perform productive services with right to compensation during the so called “lunch or eating periods.” There was no real lunch period allocated. Services of the same type and continuity were rendered at all times.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment for the plaintiff for $645.191 unpaid overtime wages without liquidated damages and attorney’s fees of $75 and costs are ordered.
Plaintiff’s attorney will prepare and serve Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment accordingly within 5 days from notice of this ruling.
$1.33 x 1% x 3 x 25 — $149.03 $1.748 x 1% x 3 x 03— 493.56 $045.19
Cited by
- Tully v. Joshua Hendy Corp. Civ. No. 5931 · 1948-07-28