Custom Ship Interiors v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis
300 F.3d 510 · 2002
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on O'Dell III v. Jd Netherland · Metropolitan Stevedore Co. v. Rambo · Universal Maritime Service Corp. v. Wright · H.B. Zachry Co. v. Quinones · The Wausau Insurance Companies v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs
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.
“received by the employee that is subject to tax withholding. Id. at 319-20 . It is important to note that the second clause does not serve to limit the first. See id. at 319 n. 10. Instead, it defines a different category of benefits that might be considered wages. Although the second clause encompasses both monetary and in kind compensation so long as it is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“under the Act. Because the per diem payments were disbursed to the employee each week despite the fact that Custom Ship knew that he was incurring no food or lodging expenses needing reimbursement, we affirm the judgment of the BRB that the payments were includable as”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Id. at 323 . 30 The majority suggests that if an employee does not incur the expenses up to the amount of per diem for meals and lodging, it somehow receives the balance as compensation for services. If this principle were correct, every employee who”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.