29 C.F.R. § 553.215
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2023 · leading case: Cleveland v. City of Los Angeles, 420 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2005).
Cleveland v. City of Los Angeles, 420 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2005). “This sentence is followed by an explicit cross-reference to 29 C.F.R. § 553.215 . According to § 553.”
Horan v. King Cnty., Washington, Div. of Emergency Med. Servs., 740 F. Supp. 1471 (W.D. Wash. 1990). “29 C.F.R. § 553.215 (a). Consequently, King County concluded that its paramedics could be treated as fire protection employees and thus were covered by the section 7(kj exemption entitling them to overtime pay only after a 53-hour workweek.”
Spires v. Ben Hill Cnty., 745 F. Supp. 690 (M.D. Ga. 1990). “29 CFR § 553.215 (a). As employees of the Ben Hill County EMS, a public agency other than a fire protection or law enforcement agency, the EMTs must pass the test outlined in 29 CFR section 553.”
Jones v. City of Columbus, Georgia, 120 F.3d 248 (11th Cir. 1997). “211(b), or if “their services are substantially related to firefighting or law enforcement activities,” 29 C.F.R. § 553.215 (a). The City has not maintained that its EMS personnel form an integral part of its fire protection or law enforcement agencies; it has only contended…”
Vela v. City of Houston, 276 F.3d 659 (5th Cir. 2001). “29 C.F.R. § 553.215 . This regulation is commonly referred to as the § 553.”
Roy v. Cnty. of Lexington, 141 F.3d 533 (4th Cir. 1998). “” 29 C.F.R. § 553.215 (a) (1997). The Act, however, does not mention EMS employees, let alone expressly exempt public employers from paying EMS personnel overtime under the normal 40-hour workweek scheme.”
Soles v. Bd. of Com'rs of Johnson Cnty., Ga., 746 F. Supp. 106 (S.D. Ga. 1990). “Defendant also cites to 29 C.F.R. § 553.215 for the proposition that a county may treat ambulance and rescue service employees of a public agency as employees engaged in fire protection or law enforcement activities if their services are “substantially related” to fire fighting…”
O'Neal v. Barrow Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 743 F. Supp. 859 (N.D. Ga. 1990). “” 29 C.F.R. § 553.215 . Discussion The court notes initially that summary judgment is only proper when “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material…”
Wouters v. Martin Cnty., Fla., 793 F. Supp. 310 (S.D. Fla. 1992). “29 CFR § 553.215 . The facts reveal that EMTs in Martin County are trained in extrication techniques and have received instruction in basic life saving and life support procedures.”
Burgess v. Catawba Cnty., 805 F. Supp. 341 (W.D.N.C. 1992). “29 C.F.R. § 553.215 (1991). The Catawba County EMS employees were paid according to the standard for employees engaged in law enforcement activities.”
Kurt W. Bond, Cross-Appellants v. City of Jackson, Cross-Appellee, 939 F.2d 285 (5th Cir. 1991). “29 C.F.R. § 553.215 (a) (1990). A DOL Wage and Hour Division Administrative Letter Ruling explains the application of the “fire protection activities” exemption to emergency medical service employees: [W]e set forth two tests for determining if the activities of EMTs are…”
Wouters v. Martin Cnty., 9 F.3d 924 (11th Cir. 1993). “” 29 C.F.R. § 553.215 (a) (emphasis added).”
29 C.F.R. § 553.215(a): 2 cases
Spires v. Ben Hill Cnty., 745 F. Supp. 690 (M.D. Ga. 1990). “29 CFR § 553.215 (a). As employees of the Ben Hill County EMS, a public agency other than a fire protection or law enforcement agency, the EMTs must pass the test outlined in 29 CFR section 553.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.