Goss v. Withers

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the § 514 exemption 27 applied and, thus, the plaintiff’s failure to pay overtime claim arising out of the CBA and is preempted by § 301
• denying a motion 23 to remand based on the court’s conclusion that the plaintiff’s meal period claim under section 512 24 and overtime claim under section 510 were barred by a CBA meeting the standards of sections 25 512(e) and 514
• if 24 25 26 32 CBA, art. 21.1 – ECF No. 6 at 37 (p. 28
• “So if Section 512(e) applies, then 512(a) does not apply, and 26 plaintiff’s claimed right to meal periods cannot be said to be based on state law.”
• “[I]f Section 512(e) 4 applies, then 512(a) does not apply, and plaintiff’s claimed right to meal periods cannot be said to 5 be based on state law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).