password
username
Sponsored by CakeMail, an email marketing software.
Newsletter preview

May 28, 2008

Table of Contents

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, GOVERNMENT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW
• Lawrence v. City of Philadelphia

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, IMMIGRATION LAW
• Arca-Pineda v. Atty. Gen. of US

You May FREELY Redistribute This E-Mail in Whole
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com.

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, GOVERNMENT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW
Lawrence v. City of Philadelphia, No. 06-4564
In an action against defendant-city involving the issue of whether fire service paramedics ("FSPs") employed by a city's fire department have "legal authority and responsibility" for fire suppression activities within the meaning of Fair Labor Standards Act ("FSLA") for purposes of overtime pay requirements, summary judgment in favor of city is reversed and remanded where: 1) as a matter of law, the FSPs do not have a responsibility for fire suppression activities; and 2) FSPs were not exempted from the overtime provisions of the FLSA, as defendant failed to meet the burden of showing that those activities fell within the 29 U.S.C. section 207(k) exemption from overtime pay requirements. Read more...

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, IMMIGRATION LAW
Arca-Pineda v. Atty. Gen. of US, No. 07-1914
Petition for review of an order finding petitioner removable and denying her application for suspension of deportation is denied where: 1) petitioner's continuous physical presence clock did not begin anew based on an administrative closure; 2) contrary to claims of inequitable application of the stop-time rule to her case, allowing petitioner's application for suspension of deportation would essentially permit her to avail herself from her failure to attend a deportation proceeding, frustrating Congress's purpose in enacting the stop-time rule; 3) petitioner's purported continuous period physical presence did not satisfy the requisite statutory period "immediately proceeding" her application for suspension of deportation; and 4) retroactive application of the stop-time rule to petitioner did not violate her due process rights. Read more...


You are currently subscribed to 3rd-caselaw as: kallyorama@gmail.com . To manage your newsletter accounts go to: http://newsletters.findlaw.com/nl/sub/review-account.jsp or to ***, send a blank email to leave-3836781-1395324.5b31539e03738898a37ade5ee00be109@info.legalminds.org