nullify the statutory provision and defeat the right therein reserved to the employee.
It is our opinion that the right of the employee to maintain his action 'in any court of competent jurisdiction' may not be defeated at the election of his employer by resort to Section 28 of the Judicial Code, as amended, supra. Fredman v. Foley Bros., Inc., D.C., 50 F.Supp. 161; Booth v. Montgomery Ward & Co., D.C. 44 F.Supp. 451; Kuligowski v. Hart, D.C., 43 F.Supp. 207; Phillips v. Pucci, D.C., 43 F.Supp. 253; Wingate v. General Auto Parts Co., D.C., 40 F.Supp. 364; Stewart v. Hickman, D.C., 36 F.Supp. 861; Contra, Robertson v. Argus Hosiery Mills, 6 Cir., 121 F.2d 285; Owens v. Greenville News-Piedmont, D.C., 43 F.Supp. 785. The general provision of the Judicial Code must yield to the special provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and, to the extent of their apparent contradiction, the latter must be regarded as exceptions to the former. Wingate v. General Auto Parts Co., supra; Sanford v. Sanford, 52 App.D.C. 315, 286 F. 777; Jackson v. Cravens, 5 Cir., 238 F. 117.
The arguments advanced by the defendant in support of its contention are adequately answered in the opinion of Judge Delehant in the case of Booth v. Montgomery Ward & Co., supra. We are in complete accord with the conclusions and supporting reasons therein expressed.
This case will be remanded to the Court of Common Pleas, from which it was removed.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.