Smith v. Central Security Bureau, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the named plaintiff of an FLSA action who did not file a consent to join the collective action could remain in the suit in his individual capacity because the complaint stated that he instituted the action “individually and on behalf of [others]”
• “[Plaintiff] instituted the action ‘individually and on behalf of others.’ The plain language of the aforementioned language is open only to one interpretation, namely, that [plaintiff] was attempting to proceed in a dual capacity.”
• “Here, Smith instituted the action 23 ‘individually and on behalf of others.’ The plain language of the aforementioned language is open only to one interpretation, namely, that Smith was attempting to proceed in a dual capacity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).