Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Oral Argument Before Supreme Court in Kasten FLSA Retaliation Case

Oral Argument Before Supreme Court in Kasten FLSA Retaliation Case

Ratings: (0)|Views: 28|Likes:
Published by Michael Pancier
Major case to be decided by the Court on what constitutes protected activity under section 15(a)(3) of the FLSA
Major case to be decided by the Court on what constitutes protected activity under section 15(a)(3) of the FLSA

More info:

Published by: Michael Pancier on Oct 14, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/24/2012

pdf

text

original

 
 
510152025
Official - Subject to Final Review
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x3 KEVIN KASTEN, :4 Petitioner :v. : No. 09-8346 SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS :7 CORPORATION :8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x9 Washington, D.C.Wednesday, October 13, 20101112 The above-entitled matter came on for oral13 argument before the Supreme Court of the United States14 at 11:05 a.m.APPEARANCES:16 JAMES H. KASTER, ESQ., Minneapolis, Minnesota; on behalf17 of Petitioner.18 JEFFREY B. WALL, ESQ., Assistant to the Solicitor19 General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; onbehalf of the United States, as amicus curiae,21 supporting Petitioner.22 CARTER G. PHILLIPS, ESQ., Washington, D.C.; on behalf23 of Respondents.241
Alderson Reporting Company
 
 
510152025
Official - Subject to Final Review
1 C O N T E N T S2 ORAL ARGUMENT OF PAGE3 JAMES H. KASTER, ESQ.4 On behalf of the Petitioner 3ORAL ARGUMENT OF6 JEFFREY B. WALL, ESQ.7 On behalf of the United States,8 As amicus curiae, supporting Petitioner 169 ORAL ARGUMENT OFCARTER G. PHILLIPS, ESQ.11 On behalf of the Respondent 2612 REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF13 JAMES H. KASTER, ESQ.14 On behalf of the Petitioner 5016171819212223242
Alderson Reporting Company
 
510152025
Official - Subject to Final Review
1 P R O C E E D I N G S2 (11:05 a.m.)3 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We will hear4 argument next in Case 09-834, Kasten v. Saint-GobainPerformance Plastics Corporation.6 Mr. Kaster.7 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES H. KASTER8 ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER9 MR. KASTER: Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice,and may it please the Court:11 When Kevin Kasten told his employer that the12 location of the time clocks was illegal and that if they13 were taken to the court they would lose, he filed any14 complaint within the meaning of the 215(a)(3) under theFair Labor Standards Act, because filing includes an16 oral communication, because "any" means any, which17 includes formal or informal, written or unwritten18 communications. And the words in the statute were19 designed to have a broad construction under section 2 ofthe statute 202 and under Mitchell v. DeMario and the21 Tennessee Coal case.22 I would like to begin with the Tennessee23 Coal case, Tennessee Coal v. Muscoda. The Court24 interpreted "work" in a broad fashion to include thetime in a mine when workers were moving from one place3
Alderson Reporting Company

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->