# Supplemental Brief — Eastern Photographic Laboratories, Inc. v. Braunstein > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385005_2523%3A2 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Supplemental Brief - **Published:** January 1, 1979 - **Citation:** 441 U.S. 944 ## Text ‘Suprema Court, U.S | IN THE MICHABL RODAK, JR., CLERK | Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1978 No. 78-1306 EasterRN Pxotocraruic Lasoratories, INc., AND Heart or America Portraits, Inc., Petitioners, vs. Rosperta BRAUNSTEIN, Respondent. PETITIONERS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SHavun S, Sutirvan 195 Church Street New Haven, Connecticut 06508 (203) 789-1511 Of Counsel: Wru1aM J. DoyLe MarsHAt. B. Basson 195 Church Street New Haven, Connecticut 06508 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1978 No. 78-1306 ee Eastern PxHotocrapuic Laporatortes, INC., AND Heart or America Portraits, INc., Petitioners, VS. Rosperta BRAUNSTEIN, Respondent. PETITIONERS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SS Eastern Photographie Laboratories, Inc., and Heart of America Portraits, Inc. (hereinafter colectively referred to as “Kastern”) file the following supplemental brief in support of Eastern’s pending petition for a writ of cer- tiorari on the sole issue of whether, as respondent contends, the present appeal is moot. The Appeal Is Not Moot Notwithstanding the fact that on March 21, 1979, the Dis- trict Court ordered that notice be mailed to other present and former Eastern employees, it is clear that the present appeal is not moot. 2 On April 2, 1979, plaintiff filed the annexed motion to com- pel, thereby once again seeking the District Court’s assist- ance in effectuating the issuance of notice to other present and former Eastern employees. See plaintiff’s inter- rogatories dated July 5, 1978, Appendix p. ia and plaintiff’s motion to compel dated April 2, 1979, Appendix p. da. The filing of the present motion makes it abundantly clear that (1) there remains a substantial controversy between the parties over the appropriateness of notifying potential class members of the pendency of this section 16(b) Fair Labor Standards Act action, and (2) the District Court continues to be called upon to exercise its powers to effec- tuate the giving of notice in this section 16(b) Fair Labor Standards Act action. Moreover, the filing of the present motion demonstrates that this is an issue “capable of repeti- tion, yet evading review.” Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. I.C.C., 219 U.S. 498, 515 (1911) ; Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 125 (1973). See Sosna v. Iowa, 419 U.S. 393, 399 (1975) ; cf. Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 148-49 (1975); Preiser v. Newkirk, 422 U.S. 395, 401-03 (1975). It is clear, therefore, that the issue of whether or not the District Court has the power to advise potential litigants of the pendency of the present action and of their right to join such action is not moot. Respectfully submitted, Suaun S. Svutirvan, Attorney for Petitioners. Of Counsel: WruiuM J. Dove MarsHaut B. Basson April 9, 1979 APPENDIX la Plaintiff’s Initial Request for Interrogatories (Filed—July 9, 1978) ~ Unrrep States District Court District or CONNECTICUT Civil Action No. B78-252 Roserta BravnstTEIn, Plaintiff, vs. Eastern PxHotocrapHic Lasoratorigs, Inc. Heart oF America Portraits, INc., Defendants. The Plaintiff seeks and requests the following informa- tion of the Defendants: “TpENTIFY” means identification of name, all home or ; business addresses known to you, including any alternate or forwarding address and last known address, social se- curity number, and telephone numbers. 1. Identify each person presently employed by you as of the date of the Answers to these Interrogatories, giving dates of employment (including initial orien- tation and training). 2. Identify each person employed by you on or after July 1, 1975 but not presently employed by you (as of the date of Answers to Interrogatories), giving 2a Plaintiff’s Initial Request for Interrogatories beginning and ending dates of employment, starting with initial orientation and training. PLAINTIFF By: A. Reynotps Gorpon, Attorney Gordon & Hiller : 855 Main St., Suite 945 Bridgeport, CT 06604 July 5, 1978. 3a Motion to Compel Unirep States District Court District oF CONNECTICUT Civil Action No. B78-252 ip. a Roperta BRAUNSTEIN, Plaintiff, Vs. EASTERN PHOTOGRAPHIC LABORATORIES, INc., et al., Defendants. The Plaintiff in the above entitled matter respectfully represents: 1. Under date of July 5, 1978 the Plaintiff filed her ini- tial request for interrogatories. 2. On said date the Court granted (without prejudice) the Plaintiff’s motion to shorten the time to answer said interrogatories to ten days. 3. On July 24, 1978 the Defendants objected to said re- quest for interrogatories, the objections were overruled on July 27, 1978. 4. On July 21, 1978 the Defendants provided lists of names and addresses of employees. da Motion to Compel 5. The Defendants did not provide any answers under oath as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the list provided did not contain dates of employment, al- ternate addresses, telephone numbers and social security numbers, all as required on said initial request for inter- rogatories, and some of the zip codes were unstated. 6. The Plaintiff sent out the Court-authorized notices to 463 employees on March 21, 1979. 7. As of April 2, 1979 87 notice envelopes have been re- turned to the Court Clerk’s office for lack of proper address. 8. The Defendants have not brought the list of em- ployees up to date. TuHereroreE the Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Defendants be CompEL_en to provide: 1. As to each employee whose notice envelope was re- turned by the Postal authorities to the Clerk of this Court: a. An oath by the Personnel Manager that the address given is accurate and that there is no alternate or forward- ing address. b. The employee’s social security number. e. Telephone numbers. d. Dates of employment. 2. As to each employee whose consent is filed, the dates of employment of that employee, giving beginning and ending dates of employment, starting with initial orienta- tion and training. da Motion to Compel 2 Full answers to the Initial Request for Interroga- tories as to each photographer employed since July 20, 1978 and up to the present time. Tue PLAINTIFF By: A. Rrynotps Gorpon Of: Gordon & Ililler 855 Main St., Suite 946 Bridgeport CT 06604 CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed postage prepaid to all counsel of record. A. Reynoips Gorpon April 2, 1979. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385005_2523%3A2. Public record. Not legal advice.