S. A. Schulte, Inc. v. Gangi
328 U.S. 108 (1946)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

S. A. Schulte, Inc. v. Gangi, 328 U.S. 108 (1946)

S. A. Schulte, Inc. v. Gangi

No. 517

Argued March 1, 1946

Decided April 29, 1946

328 U.S. 108

Syllabus

1. An employer cannot be relieved from liability for liquidated damages under § 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act by a compromise or settlement of a bona fide dispute as to the coverage of the Act. P. 328 U. S. 114.

2. The purpose of the Fair Labor Standards Act -- to secure a subsistence wage for low income workers -- requires that neither wages nor the damages for withholding them be reducible by compromise of controversies over coverage. Pp. 328 U. S. 116-118, 328 U. S. 121.

3. Maintenance employees of a building the occupants of which receive, work on, and return in intrastate commerce goods belonging to nonoccupants who subsequently, in the regular course of their business, ship substantial proportions of the occupants' products to other States held covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act. P. 328 U. S. 120.

4. The burden of proof that rests upon employees to establish that they are engaged in the production of goods for commerce within the coverage of the Fair Labor Standards Act must be met by evidence in the record. P. 328 U. S. 120.

5. In determining whether employees are engaged in the "production of goods for commerce" within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act, it is sufficient that, from the circumstances of production,

Page 328 U. S. 109

a trier of fact may reasonably infer that the employer has reasonable grounds to anticipate that his products will move in interstate commerce. Walling v. Jacksonville Paper Co.,317 U. S. 564, distinguished. Pp. 328 U. S. 119, 328 U. S. 121.

6. Mere separation of the economic processes of production for commerce between different industrial units, even without any degree of common ownership, does not destroy the continuity of production for commerce. P. 328 U. S. 121.

150 F.2d 694 affirmed.

Respondent, suing on behalf of himself and other employees similarly situated, brought suit against his employer to recover liquidated damages under § 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The District Court held that the liability of the employer had been validly released. 53 F.Supp. 844. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. 150 F.2d 694. This Court granted certiorari. 326 U.S. 712. Affirmed, p. 328 U. S. 121.

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.