Indergit v. Rite Aid Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2020
2 district ·
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. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 202 · 29 U.S.C. § 207 · 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 29 U.S.C. § 216
Relies on Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling · Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin
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.
“primary duty is the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer's customers,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“conditional certification, decertification, and Rule 23 class certification are subject to disparate legal standards,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“primary duty includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance.”
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.