Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 F.2d 320 - Richter v. Barrett

Richter v. Barrett’s Empirical Analysis

173 F.2d 320 · 1949

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
July 2008
most recently cited

1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 2008

1 district · 4 state decisions

601949195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 29 U.S.C. § 216

Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. Missel · Allred v. Sasser · Walling v. General Industries Co. · Walling v. Keansburg Steamboat Co.

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The term ‘employee employed in a bona fide executive * * * capacity’ in section 13(a) (1) of the act shall mean any employee: “ (a) Whose primary duty consists of the management of the enterprise in which he is employed or of a customarily recognized department or subdivision thereof; and “(b) Who customarily and regularly directs the work of two or more other employees therein; and “(c) Who has the authority to hire or fire other employees or whose suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring or firing and as to the advancement and promotion or any other change of status of other employees will be given particular weight; and “(d) Who customarily and regularly exercises discretionary powers; and”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The Fair Labor Standards Act is remedial and calls for a liberal construction, but each case must stand on its own facts. * * * Exemptions are to be restrictively interpreted. * * * It is the employer’s burden to prove that the employee is exempt from the coverage of the Act. * * * ””
    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.