591 F. Supp. 537 - Zumerling v. Marsh’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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.

1. “No public agency shall be deemed to have violated subsection (a) of this section with respect to the employment of any employee in fire protection activities or any employee in law enforcement activities (including security personnel in correctional institutions) if— (1) in a work period of 28 consecutive days the employee receives for tours of duty which in the aggregate exceed the lesser of (A) 216 hours, or (B) the average number of hours (as determined by the Secretary pursuant to section 6(c)(3) of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1974) in tours of duty of employees engaged in such activities in work periods of 28 consecutive days in calendar year 1975; or (2) in the case of such an employee to whom a work period of at least 7 but less than 28 days applies, in his work period the employee receives for tours of duty which in the aggregate exceed a number of hours which bears the same ratio to the number of consecutive days in his work period as 216 hours (or if lower, the number of hours referred to in clause (B) of paragraph (1)) bears to 28 days,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Brooks v. Weinberger

2. “[I]f the district court would otherwise have had jurisdiction over each class member's claim were such claim presented separately, Tucker Act jurisdiction would have been available even though when all individual claims were aggregated the total amount claimed exceeded one billion dollars.” Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. National Association of Flood Insurers, 520 F.2d 11 , 25 (3d Cir.1975). See also Zumerling v. Marsh, 591 F.Supp. 537 , 543 (W.D.Pa. 1984). 3 . At oral argument, plaintiffs' counsel termed the question of waiver”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hahn v. United States

3. “irregular, unscheduled overtime duty in excess of his regularly scheduled weekly tour,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Richard A. Laforte and Rickey A. Rogers v. Constance Horner, Director, U.S. Office of Personnel Management and the United States of America