Heath v. Perdue Farms, Inc.
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
87 F. Supp. 2d 452 (2000)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
Perdue Farms, Incorporated (Perdue) (defendant) was a poultry company. Perdue’s operations required the use of chicken catchers (plaintiffs) to transport chickens from farms to its factory. Perdue exercised strict control over the chicken catchers’ work. Work was to be performed pursuant to Perdue’s live-haul instructional training manual. Perdue provided constant feedback about performance. The chicken-catching crews were not permitted to increase their output for extra pay or profit. Perdue owned and maintained all of the equipment used to catch chickens. Catching chickens for Perdue required little skill. Most members of the chicken-catching crews had long-term, exclusive relationships with Perdue. Perdue exercised tight control over the chicken catching because it was integral to its business. The chicken catchers worked more than 40 hours per week but were not paid overtime wages. Over 100 individuals who worked as chicken catchers brought an action against Perdue, seeking recovery of overtime pay as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state wage laws. The chicken catchers filed a motion for summary judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Nickerson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.