Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

United States v. Rosenwasser, Doing Business As Perfect Garment Co.

• 1944 • 323 U.S. 360 • Stone Court
In the United States v. Rosenwasser, Doing Business as Perfect Garment Co., 1944 case, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether employees of a garment company were entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The defendant, Rosenwasser who owned Perfect Garment Co., argued that his employees did not qualify for overtime because they were engaged in piecework at home rather than regular hours at a factory or business premises. However, the court ruled...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Stone Court
Term: 1944
Docket: 106
323 U.S. 360
65 S. Ct. 295
89 L. Ed. 301
1945 U.S. LEXIS 2719
Argued: Dec 12, 1944

United States v. Rosenwasser, Doing Business As Perfect Garment Co.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. Rosenwasser, Doing Business as Perfect Garment Co., 1944 case, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether employees of a garment company were entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The defendant, Rosenwasser who owned Perfect Garment Co., argued that his employees did not qualify for overtime because they were engaged in piecework at home rather than regular hours at a factory or business premises. However, the court ruled against him stating that FLSA's provisions applied regardless of where work was performed and irrespective of how wages are calculated - hourly or by piecework. Therefore, it held that these workers should receive overtime compensation when their work exceeded forty hours per week as stipulated by FLSA. This decision underscored an expansive interpretation of federal labor law protections.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Rosenwasser, the justice argued that the majority's interpretation of "produced" in relation to Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) was too broad and inconsistent with Congress' intent. The justice believed that an employee should only be considered as having 'produced' goods if they were directly involved in their physical creation or transformation, not merely because they performed tasks within a company that produced such goods. This would mean workers like janitors or office staff at manufacturing companies wouldn't fall under FLSA protections simply due to their employment there. Furthermore, he disagreed with applying FLSA provisions retroactively on employers who had no reason to believe these employees fell under its scope when wages were paid. He feared this could lead to unjust penalties against employers acting in good faith based on reasonable interpretations of existing law.

Opinion written by Justice FMurphy
Decided: Jan 02, 1945
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms