Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 05 May 1945 |
| Docket Number | No. 12879.,12879. |
| Citation | 149 F.2d 116 |
| Parties | COLQUETTE v. CROSSETT LUMBER CO. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Charles E. Wright and J. R. Wilson, both of El Dorado, Ark., for appellant.
H. S. Yocum, of El Dorado, Ark. (J. K. Mahony, of El Dorado, Ark., on the brief), for appellee.
Before SANBORN, WOODROUGH, and RIDDICK, Circuit Judges.
Ray Harris brought this action against his employer, the Crossett Lumber Company, to recover overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees as provided by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq. The trial in the district court resulted in a judgment in favor of Harris from which he appealed. Following the death of Harris after the taking of the appeal, the administrator of his estate has been substituted as appellant.
In the complaint which was filed May 20, 1943, Harris alleged that he had been employed by the lumber company continuously from October 24, 1938, until October 3, 1942, and that throughout this period the lumber company had failed to pay him for his hours of overtime in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act. In its answer the lumber company denied that Harris had worked more than the maximum hours permitted by the Fair Labor Standards Act in any week during the time of his employment, and alleged that his claim for overtime and damages accruing before May 20, 1940, was barred by the statute of limitations of the State of Arkansas where the parties resided and where the controversy arose and was tried. The district court sustained the lumber company's plea of the statute of limitations, and, on conflicting evidence, found that Harris was entitled to recover for the period of his employment beginning May 20, 1940. A judgment in his favor for $2,266.35 covering compensation for overtime, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees was entered on November 29, 1943.
On December 14, 1943, the lumber company drew a check payable to Harris and his attorney for the amount of the judgment, with interest from its date until the date of the check, less deductions amounting to $21.59 which the lumber company thought it was required to make for Federal social security and victory taxes on compensation payable by it to Harris. This check in the amount of $2,244.76 was tendered to Harris and his counsel, apparently with an explanation of the deductions, in full and final settlement of the judgment. It was accepted by Harris and his counsel as tendered, without objection, and was paid by the lumber company's bank on December 21, 1943. On January 12, 1944, Harris filed in the district court a motion to correct the judgment by the addition of interest, computed at the rate of six per cent per annum from the date on which each weekly installment of wages became due and payable until the entry of the judgment on November 29, 1943. On January 21, 1944, Harris filed an amended and substituted motion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Keen v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corporation
...and liquidated damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Accord: J. F. Fitzgerald Const. Co. v. Pedersen, supra; Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co., 8 Cir., 1945, 149 F.2d 116. The defendant in this case on July 16, 1941, was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $856.06. If the rule were......
-
Chicago Great Western Ry. Co. v. Beecher
...73 L.Ed. 954. But the acceptance of the benefits of a judgment constitutes an abandonment of the right to appeal. Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co., 8 Cir., 149 F.2d 116, 118. Another well established rule is that courts will decide only actual controversies, and that an appellate court, whe......
-
Wirtz v. Old Dominion Corporation
...awarded. Up until the passage of the Act in 1947, all the courts followed the Brooklyn Savings Bank case. See Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co., 149 F.2d 116, 117 (8th Cir. 1945); Phillips v. Star Overall Dry Cleaning Laundry Co., 149 F.2d 416, 420 (2d Cir. 1945); Kreeft v. R. W. Bates Piece......
-
Little Rock Packing Co. v. Massachusetts Bond. & Ins. Co.
...the part of the debt thus expressly stated to be discharged, as `remise, release, quitclaim, and acquit.\' * * *" In Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co., 8 Cir., 149 F.2d 116, this court had occasion to consider the effect of a release of a judgment upon the right to appeal. There, a laborer s......
-
Avoiding a Quagmire: Acquiescence in a Judgment as a Bar to Appeal by Casey R. Law
...957 (1968); K.S.A. 60-208(d)(3). [15] State v. Massa, 90 Kan. 129, syl. ¶ 2, 132 P. 1182 (1913). [16] Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co., 149 F.2d 116, 117-118 (8th Cir. 1945) (internal citations omitted). [17] Babbitt, 13 Kan. at 614. [18] Seaverns v. State, 76 Kan. 920, 921-22, 93 P. 163 (1......
-
Avoiding a Quagmire
...P.2d 957 (1968); K.S.A. 60-208(d)(3). [15] State v. Massa, 90 Kan. 129, syl. ¶ 2, 132 P 1182 (1913). [16]Colquette v. Crossett Lumber Co., 149 F.2d 116, 117-118 (8th Cir. 1945) (internal citations omitted). [17] Babbitt, 13 Kan. at 614. [18]Seaverns v. State, 76 Kan. 920, 921-22, 93 P 163 (......