Court Opinion

ID: 9454747
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 18:57:50.459288+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:34:17.345165
License: Public Domain

SIMPSON, Circuit Judge
(concurring specially):
I concur fully in Part II of the opinion reversing the refusal of the district court to enter a mandatory injunction requiring restitution of past due overtime wages. The refusal to provide this injunctive relief was a clear abuse of whatever slight discretion — if any— the decided cases leave to the district judge in this situation. I am content to *1371leave to another panel in another case the holding, clearly foreshadowed by the decided eases, that injunctive relief in this situation should issue as a matter of course.
As to Part I of the opinion, rather than send the case back to the district judge for further consideration of in-junctive relief against future violations, I would hold that, under the circumstances here presented, the refusal of such relief was a clear abuse of discretion, and direct that future violations be enjoined.
Accordingly, I concur specially in the Court’s opinion.