LEE

v.

MISSISSIPPI

Citator

Cited By

• Mirabal v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 537 F.2d 871 (7th Cir. 1976)
  …Supreme Court twice remanded labor cases to the district court for consideration in [*876] light of the Portal to Portal Act, after having in one already issued an opinion and in the other denied certiorari. See 149 Madison Avenue Corp. v. Asselta, 331 U.S. 795, 67 S.Ct. 1178, 91 L.Ed. 1432 (1947); Alaska Juneau Gold Mining Co. v. Robertson, 331 U.S. 793, 67 S.Ct. 1314, 91 L.Ed. 1839 (1947).5 In the courts of appeals judgments for overtime wages which had been rendered in the trial courts prior to passage…
• Mem'l Hosp. v. Heckler, 706 F.2d 1130 (11th Cir. 1983)
  …e of final judgment, including, when a case is on review, the time of appellate judgment.” Until appellate rights are exhausted, even an otherwise valid judgment may be negated by supervening legislation. See, eg., 149 Madison Ave. Corp. v. Asselta, 331 U.S. 795, 67 S.Ct. 1726, 91 L.Ed. 1822 (1947) modifying 331 U.S. 199, 67 S.Ct. 1178, 91 L.Ed. 1432 (1947), (Supreme Court modified its own judgment to allow a district court to consider a defense created by Congress after the Supreme Court’s judgment, but du…
• Reed v. Murphey, 168 F.2d 257 (5th Cir. 1948)
  ….S. 169, 178, 61 S.Ct. 176, 85 L.Ed. 109. In any event, defendants are still entitled to assert any new defenses which may be created by the Portal-to-Portal Pay Act, if such exist. 29 U.S.C.A. § 251, et seq., 258; 149 Madison Ave. Corp. v. Asselta, 331 U.S. 795, 67 S.Ct. 1726; St. Johns River Shipbldg. Co. v. Adams, 5 Cir., 164 F. 2d 1012; McCloskey & Co. v. Eckhart, 5 Cir., 164 F. 2d 257. Only portions of the two contracts in question are to be found in the record, and we are therefore unable to pass upo…