10 East 40th Street Building, Inc. v. Callus’s Empirical Analysis
325 U.S. 578 · 1945
Citation profile
170 federal appellate · 28 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 324 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2013 · most notably D. A. Schulte, Inc. v. Gangi (1946), Maneja v. Waialua Agricultural Co. (1955)
170 federal appellate · 28 district · 14 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedCallus v. 10 East Fortieth Street Building, Inc. (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Wickard v. Filburn · Kirschbaum v. Walling US Arsenal Bldg Corporation · Walling v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · Armour & Co. v. Wantock
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 324 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * Regardful of the governing principle that coverage turns upon the nature of the employees' duties, and not upon the nature, local or interstate, of the employer's general business, we held the case [Callus] distinguishable from Borden and Kirschbaum because the employment, since part of an enterprise which `spontaneously satisfies the common understanding of what is local business,' was itself sufficiently different, despite identical employee duties, from prior cases to justify regarding it as separate from the `necessary parts of a commercial process' which are within the Act. These decisions and distinctions were not exercises in lexicography. No niceties in phrasing or formula of words could do service for judgment, could dispense with painstaking appraisal of all the variant elements in the different situations presented by successive cases in light of the purpose of Congress to limit coverage short of the exercise by it of its full power under the Commerce Clause.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Lines are not the worse for being narrow if they are drawn on rational considerations.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * the scope of the Act is not coextensive with the limits of the power of Congress over commerce, * * *. * * the Fair Labor Standards Act puts upon the courts the independent responsibility of applying ad hoc the general terms of the statute to an infinite variety of complicated industrial situations. ■* * * “ * * * the provisions of the Act expressly make its application dependant upon the character of the employees’ activities. * * * "”
3 later decisions 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.