Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 182 FSUPP 800 - Mitchell v. Sorvas

Mitchell v. Sorvas’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
May 1963
most recently cited

7 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1337 · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 29 U.S.C. § 213

Relies on Mitchell v. Kentucky Finance Co. · Mitchell v. C. W. Vollmer & Co. · Alstate Const Co v. Durkin · H. J. Boisseau v. James P. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor · Mitchell v. Kroger 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““§ 213. Exemptions “(a) The provisions of sections 206 and 207 of this title shall not apply with respect to * * * (2) any employee employed by any retail or service establishment, more than 50 per centum of which establishment’s annual dollar volume of sales of goods or services is made within the State in which the establishment is located. A ‘retail or service establishment’ shall mean an establishment 75 per centum of whose annual dollar volume of sales of goods or services (or both) is not for resale and is recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry; * * *” 29 U.S.C.A. § 213 (a) (2).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Goldberg v. Sorvas
  2. ““These authorities hold to the view that as long as the purchaser is the ultimate consumer, not intending to resell, said sale in the industry is considered to be a retail sale, and the exemption is applicable.” 182 F. Supp. 800 , 802.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Goldberg v. Sorvas

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.