Hoyt v. General Insurance Company of America, 15400.

• Decision Date: 19 November 1957
• Docket Number: No. 15400.,15400.
• Citation: 249 F.2d 589
• Parties: Robert Emmett HOYT, Appellant, v. GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Corporation, Appellee.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

249 F.2d 589 (1957)

Robert Emmett HOYT, Appellant, v. GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Corporation, Appellee.

No. 15400.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

November 19, 1957.

Anderson, Franklin & O'Brien, Ben Anderson, Portland, Or., for appellant.

Mautz, Souther, Spaulding, Denecke & Kinsey, Wayne Williamson, Portland, Or., for appellee.

Before HEALY, BONE and POPE, Circuit Judges.

BONE, Circuit Judge.

This action was brought by Robert Emmett Hoyt (hereafter Hoyt) to recover payment for overtime work from the General Insurance Company of America under Section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 207. The lower court found for the defendant on the ground that plaintiff was an "administrative employee" within the meaning of Section 13 of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 213, and therefore exempt from the provisions of Section 7 of the Act.

Appellee, General Insurance Company of America (hereafter General) is engaged in the general insurance business; authorized to do business in Oregon and Washington, and engaged in interstate commerce.

Hoyt was employed by General from March 1, 1954 to May 15, 1955 for the purpose of inspecting boilers and various other types of machinery insured by General, and making reports to General concerning the condition of these machines and boilers. During his employment by appellee, Hoyt was assigned a territory within which it was his duty to inspect all the objects located therein which were insured by General. The scheduling of inspections was of appellant's own making. In conducting his inspections, Hoyt necessarily had to crawl inside the boilers to be inspected for the purpose of testing the insured objects but his duties did not include any elements of repair or alteration of the objects being inspected. The objects were dismantled and prepared for inspection by employees of the owner of the objects.

Hoyt's reports to General covered his opinion as to the safety of the object inspected, and in the event he felt that the inspected object was unsafe, included his recommendations as to what should be done to make the object a better risk. These reports were edited for grammar and spelling and copies distributed, one such copy being sent to the insured. Hoyt was also expected to confer with the insured concerning the safety of the insured object and to try to persuade the insured to make the necessary changes. In the event that the insured was uncooperative the matter would be referred to Hoyt's superiors. In no case was Hoyt allowed to make an on-the-spot...