Karanjawala v. Assoc. Humane Societies, Inc., No. A-3560-08T2 (App. Div., August 20, 2010) – The plaintiff, a zoo employee who voluntarily resided on zoo property, worked three night shifts per week. During two of the shifts, he was required to be on premises to answer the phone and dispatch other resident employees to off-site emergencies, except when he specifically sought permission to leave the premises to perform an errand. During the third shift, he did not have telephone duty and could be “anywhere,” but he was required to personally respond to off-site animal emergencies, for which he carried a beeper and cell phone. In awarding the plaintiff $45,000 in overtime, the court determined that the plaintiff was “engaged to be waiting” during the first two shifts because he could not leave the property and was therefore entitled to be compensated. During the third shift, however, the plaintiff’s movements and activities were not restricted, as he was only “waiting to be engaged.” Therefore, he was not entitled to overtime for the third shift.