Idaho Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Wirtz’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
199 federal appellate · 75 district · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 545 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2021 · most notably The Washington Post Company v. Eugene J. Keogh (1966), Prakash v. American University (1984)
199 federal appellate · 75 district · 35 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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
reviewedWirtz v. Idaho Sheet Metal Works, Inc. (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 29 U.S.C. § 215
Relies on United States v. American Trucking Associations · Arnold v. Ben Kanowsky, Inc. · Idaho Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Wirtz · Mitchell v. Kentucky Finance Co. · Roland Electrical Co. v. Walling
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 545 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““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; * *”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The entire legislative history of this section of the Act and numerous court cases based on this exemption indicate that the exemption is intended to apply to establishments which are engaged in the traditional selling of goods or services to the public at the end of the stream of distribution. Typical of the establishments Congress considered for exemption are grocery stores, restaurants, hotels, clothing stores, barber shops, beauty shops, drug stores, etc. Employment agencies and firms similarly providing temporary employees, while they may perform 'service' within some meanings of the term, do not perform 'service' of the kind paid to consumers by those service establishments which were within the meaning of the retail or service establishment exemption. The legislative debates on this exemption named telephone, gas and electric, and credit companies along with a number of others as businesses outside the exemption. This demonstrates that not everything the consumer purchases can be a retail sale of goods or services.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(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, if such establishment- — • “(i) is not in an enterprise described in section 203(s) of this title, or “(ii) is in such an enterprise and is a hotel, motel, restaurant, or motion picture theater; or is an amusement or recreational establishment that operates on a seasonal basis, or “(iii) is in such an enterprise and is a hospital, or an institution which is primarily engaged in the care of the sick, the aged, the mentally ill or defective, residing on the premises of such institution, or a school for physically or mentally handicapped or gifted children, or “(iv) is in such an enterprise and has an annual dollar volume of sales (ex-elusive of excise taxes at the retail level which are separately stated) which is less than $250,000. “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 “(3) any employee employed by any establishment engaged in laundering, cleaning, or repairing clothing or fabrics, more than 50 per centum of which establishment’s annual dollar vol”
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.