Arnold v. Ben Kanowsky, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

593 federal appellate · 211 district · 57 state decisions

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 1,601 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “narrowly construed against the employers seeking to assert them and their application limited to those establishments plainly and unmistakably within their terms and spirit.”

   43 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Acme Car & Truck Rentals, Inc. v. Hooper · Hodgson v. Hotard

2. “(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 of both) is not for resale and is recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry; or * * * (4) any employee employed by an establishment which qualifies as an exempt retail establishment under clause (2) of this subsection and is recognized as a retail establishment in the particular industry notwithstanding that such establishment makes or processes at the retail establishment the goods that it sells * * *.”

   10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Goldberg v. Sorvas · Norman v. Moseley

3. ““Petitioner [plaintiff employee] admittedly is engaged in the manufacture of phenolic parts for commerce. That this activity may be considered a ‘sideline’ from respondent’s [employer’s] viewpoint does not remove petitioner from coverage under the Fair Labor Standards Act unless the respondent’s activities fall within the specific exemptions enumerated in § 13 of the Act. As originally passed in 1938, the Fair Labor Standards Act exempted from coverage ‘any employee engaged in any retail or service establishment the greater part of whose selling or servicing is in intrastate commerce.’ In 1949 Congress substituted a three-part definition for this provision. Any employee employed by a retail or service establishment is to be exempt if more than 50% of the establishment’s annual dollar volume of sales is made within the State, if 75% of its annual sales volume is not for resale, and if 75% of its annual sales volume is recognized within the industry as retail sales. ****** “While § 13(a) (2) contains the requirements every retail establishment must satisfy to qualify for exemption, a retailer-manufacturer must satisfy the additional requirements of § 13(a) (4) since it ‘makes or processes’ the goods it sells. “Turning to the facts of this case, it is clear that respondent, through its fabrication of phenolic parts, is ‘making or processing the goods that it sells.’ To gain exemption it therefore must comply with the criteria of § 13(a) (2) as they are incorporated by reference ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Norman v. Moseley · Brennan v. Valley Towing Co.