Bass v. Warren Fish Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that plaintiffs face “only a very limited burden . . . for purposes of proceeding as a collective action” (citations omitted)
• noting that plaintiffs face “only a very limited burden . . . for purposes of proceeding as a collective action”
• noting that “no showing of numerosity, typicality, commonality and representativeness need be made” in a collective action (quoting Foster v. Food Emporium, No. 99 Civ. 3860 (CM), 2000 WL 1737858, at (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 26, 2000))
• noting that “no showing of numerosity, typicality, commonality and representativeness need be made” in a collective action (quoting Foster v. Food Emporium, No. 99 Civ. 3860 (CM), 2000 WL 1737858, at (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 26, 2000))
• finding it sufficient to show that the defendant “classified [a position] as exempt from the FLSA and that it did in fact have a policy not to compensate [employees in that position] for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week”
• misclassification case certified as a collective action where it was undisputed what work employees with a particular job title performed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).