· 11/6/1951
McReynolds v. Pocahontas Corp.
Citations
- 192 F.2d 301
- 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 3407
- 20 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 66,636
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Appellants' final contention is that [Appellee] lost his exempt status during strike periods by performing manual labor. This contention can be best answered in the language of the Kentucky Court in Mafizola v. Hardy-Burlingham Mining Co., 207 S.W.2d 769, 771 (Ky. 1948
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Parker, Dobie
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.