Mitchell v. Kroger Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 213
Relies on Kirschbaum v. Walling US Arsenal Bldg Corporation · Phillips v. Walling US · McLeod v. Threlkeld · Overstreet v. North Shore Corp. · Bozant v. Bank of New York
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(2) [A]ny employee employed by any retail or service establishment * * * if more than 50 per centum of such establishment’s annual dollar volume of sales of goods or services is made within the State in which the establishment is located, and such establishment is not in an enterprise described in section 203 (s) of this title or such establishment has an annual dollar volume of sales which is less than $250,000 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level which are separately stated). A ‘retail or service establishment’ shall mean an establishment 75 per centum of whose annual dollar volume of goods and services (or of both) is not for resale and is recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The audit reports are reviewed by branch office accounting personnel, and information from them is reviewed by branch office management and district managers. The audit report furnishes [store shortage and overage] information which is used by the branch office accountants in preparing profit and loss statements to the Home Office in Cincinnati, Ohio.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Prior to 1949, Section 13(a)(2) provided exemption for any `employee engaged in any retail or service establishment.' In 1949 Congress enacted a legislative change, substituting the words `employed by' for the words `engaged in'. Further amendments were made to Section 13, clearly and definitely broadening and clarifying the existing exemptions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.