Frost-Arnett Co. v. Tobin, Sec'y of Labor, 264 F.2d 246 (6th Cir. 1959). · Go Syfert
Frost-Arnett Co. v. Tobin, Sec'y of Labor, 264 F.2d 246 (6th Cir. 1959). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon, Inc. (nysd, 1977-05-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · 1977 · signal: see · confidence high
See Research Electronics Devices Co. v. Neptune Meter Co., 156 F.Supp. 484, 485-86 (S.D.N.Y.1957), aff’d on opinion below, 264 F.2d 246 (2d Cir. 1959).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
FROST-ARNETT COMPANY, Appellant,
v.
TOBIN, Secretary of Labor, Appellee
13616_1.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Feb 23, 1959.
264 F.2d 246
Tom P. Mitchell, Memphis, Tenn., O. B. Hofstetter, Jr., Nashville, Tenn., for appellant., Stuart Rothman, Bessie Margolin, Beate Bloch and Sylvia S. Ellison, Washington, D. C., Jeter S. Ray, Regional Atty., and David V. Manker, U. S. Dept, of Labor, Nashville, Tenn., for appellee.
Martin, Allen, Miller.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

This case has been heard and considered upon the oral arguments and printed briefs, with appendices, of the attorneys for the contending parties and upon the record in the ease;

And it appearing that the findings of fact of the district court are supported by substantial evidence and are not clearly erroneous and that the conclusions of .law of District Judge Boyd are correctly drawn;

The order of the district court is affirmed, wherein it is directed that, in order to purge itself of contempt, the[*247] respondent-appellant pay to the petitioner-appellee the sum of $20,309.14, being the amount equal to that for overtime compensation due the named employees of the respondent-appellant;

And the further order of the court is affirmed, wherein it is directed that the appellant pay to the appellee a compensatory fine of $2,141, to reimburse the petitioner-appellee in part for his reasonable costs and necessary expenses in the investigation of respondent-appellant’s operations and in the prosecution of this civil contempt action.

The order of the district court is in all things affirmed.