Skip to main content
S.D. New York· 6/9/2005

Young v. Cooper Cameron Corp.

Citations

  • 229 F.R.D. 50
  • 10 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1183
  • 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11054
  • 2005 WL 1355095

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).

Judges: Gorenstein

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

44 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced 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.