Overstreet v. North Shore Corporation
| Decision Date | 30 October 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 393.,393. |
| Citation | 43 F. Supp. 445 |
| Parties | OVERSTREET et al. v. NORTH SHORE CORPORATION et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida |
Dillon Hartridge and John W. Lee, both of Jacksonville, Fla., for plaintiff.
W. Gregory Smith and R. R. Axtell, both of Jacksonville, Fla., for defendant.
Chas. H. Spitz, Associate Wage & Hour Atty., of Jacksonville, Fla., amicus curiae.
The Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., provides that employees engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for commerce shall be paid the minimum wage and shall be paid time and a half for overtime. It does not provide that employees engaged in a business that affects interstate commerce, or in an instrumentality used by others for interstate commerce, shall be paid the minimum wage or time and a half. The employees in this case were maintaining a toll road. Neither the employees nor the employer were engaged in interstate commerce under the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Detroit International Bridge Company v. Corporation Tax Appeal Board, 294 U.S. 83, 55 S.Ct. 332, 333, 79 L.Ed. 777. In the latter case the bridge company was operating an international toll bridge from Michigan to Canada and claimed an exemption from taxation of the annual franchise tax of the State of Michigan. The Michigan Statute exempted from the tax the "capital or surplus of such corporation represented by property exclusively used in interstate commerce." Pub.Acts Mich.1921, No. 85, § 5, Pub.Acts 1929, No. 175. The bridge company contended that since it maintained a toll bridge over which interstate and foreign commerce traveled no tax would be due under the exemption above quoted. The Supreme Court in the above-cited case quoted approvingly the following language from the case of Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U.S. 204, 14 S.Ct. 1087, 38 L.Ed. 962:
(Italics supplied.)
It is difficult to find clearer language. The question involved is whether the road company, and consequently its employees, was engaged in interstate commerce. If it were, the Fair Labor Standards Act would apply. If...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. Movage, Inc.
...by the statute; it only submits to their resolution in an arbitral, rather than a judicial, forum."). 117. Overstreet v. N. Shore Corp., 43 F. Supp. 445 (S.D. Fla. 1941) (granting motion to dismiss on claim that toll road employees are engaged in interstate commerce and thus entitled to all......
-
Mei Xing Yu v. Hasaki Rest., Inc.
...afforded by the statute; it only submits to their resolution in an arbitral, rather than a judicial, forum.").8 Overstreet v. N. Shore Corp ., 43 F. Supp. 445 (S.D. Fla. 1941) (granting motion to dismiss on claim that toll road employees are engaged in interstate commerce and thus entitled ......
-
Overstreet v. North Shore Corporation
...as to petitioners was granted by the district court, leave to amend being given to the other complainants who are not before us. D.C., 43 F.Supp. 445. Petitioners appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals which affirmed the order of dismissal. 5 Cir., 128 F.2d 450. The important question rai......
-
North Shore Corporation v. Barnett
...has been frustrated. I think the decision is wrong in its philosophy and most unjust in its results. 1 Overstreet v. North Shore Corporation, D.C., 43 F.Supp. 445. 2 Overstreet v. North Shore Corporation, 5 Cir., 128 F.2d 3 Appellant's witnesses testified that from five to eight per cent of......