From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Deaton v. Titusville Bldg. Corporation

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 20, 1947
72 F. Supp. 986 (S.D.N.Y. 1947)

Opinion

June 20, 1947.

Benenson, Herwitz Israelson, and Goldwater Flynn, all of New York City (James L. Goldwater and Arnold G. Malkan, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Sullivan Cromwell, of New York City (Inzer B. Wyatt, of New York City, of counsel), for defendant.


Action by Walter Deaton, suing in his own behalf and as agent and representative in the behalf of all persons and former employees of defendants similarly situated, against Titusville Building Corporation and American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corporation to recover unpaid overtime compensation, damages and attorneys' fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, § 1 et seq., 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq. On motion of defendant American Radiator and Standard Sanitary Corporation to dismiss the complaint and for other relief.

Motion denied except to the extent indicated in opinion.


This is a typical action by maintenance employees for overtime compensation, liquidated damages and attorneys' fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq.

The action was commenced on December 27, 1946, by service of a summons and complaint, and the time of the defendant American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corporation to answer has been extended from time to time by stipulation.

The defendant American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corporation makes no contention that the complaint is insufficient under the Fair Labor Standards Act as it existed prior to the enactment of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 on May 14, 1947, 29 U.S.C.A. § 251 et seq., but it insists that the complaint is now defective because it does not allege facts sufficient to bring it within the provisions of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947. Under the circumstances above described, I think that the present complaint may be deemed sufficient as a pleading, leaving it to the defendant American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corporation to set up in its answer, by way of defense, any pertinent facts with respect to the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947.

With respect to the other relief requested, the order may provide that any claimants not already listed in the complaint may apply to intervene on or before October 1, 1947, and that all claimants file written consents to become parties with the Clerk of the Court on or before October 1, 1947.

The motion of the defendant American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corporation to dismiss the complaint is denied, and the motion for other relief is also denied except to the extent above indicated.


Summaries of

Deaton v. Titusville Bldg. Corporation

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 20, 1947
72 F. Supp. 986 (S.D.N.Y. 1947)
Case details for

Deaton v. Titusville Bldg. Corporation

Case Details

Full title:DEATON v. TITUSVILLE BLDG. CORPORATION et al

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jun 20, 1947

Citations

72 F. Supp. 986 (S.D.N.Y. 1947)

Citing Cases

Shaievitz v. Laks

In this Circuit four early cases indicated that a motion to dismiss on these grounds should be denied. Lemme…

Seese v. Bethlehem Steel Co.

Counsel for the plaintiffs, however, make the point that the provision of the Portal-to-Portal Act is only an…