Kellar v. Summit Seating Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he de minimis doctrine allows employers to disregard otherwise compensable work when only a few seconds or minutes of work beyond the scheduled working hours are in dispute.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lyons v. Conagra Foods Packaged Foods LLC · Singer v. Reg'l Transp. Auth. & Pace Suburban Bus Serv.

2. “The FLSA imposes an .obligation on the employer "to exercise its control and see that the work is not performed if it does not want it to be performed.” See 29 C.F.R. § 785.13 . The employer "cannot sit back and accept the benefits without compensating for them." Id. “[The employer's] duty arises even where the employer has not requested the overtime be performed or does not desire the employee to work, or where the employee fails to report his overtime hours.” Chao v. Gotham Registry, Inc., 514 F.3d 280, 288 (2d Cir.2008). The mere promulgation of a rule against overtime work is not enough. 29 C.F.R. § 785.13 . Nor does the fact that the employee performed the work voluntarily necessarily take, her claim outside of the FLSA. 29 C.F.R. § 785.11 . However, the FLSA stops short of requiring the employer to pay for work it did not know about, and had no reason to know about. See 29 U.S.C. § 203 (g), (" 'Employ' includes to suffer or permit to work.”); Reich [v. U.S. Dep’t of Conservation & Natural Resources, State of Ala.], 28 F.3d [1076] at 1082 [(11th Cir.1994)] (“[A]n employer's knowledge is measured in accordance with his duty ... to inquire into the conditions prevailing in his business.... [A] court need only inquire whether ... [the employer] had the opportunity through reasonable diligence to acquire knowledge.” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)); 29 C.F.R. § 785.11 ("The employer knows or has reason to believe that he is continuing to work.”).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 949 F. Supp. 2d 852 - Bergman v. Kindred Healthcare, Inc. · 290 F. Supp. 3d 822 - Pietrzycki v. Heights Tower Serv., Inc.

3. “'the practical administrative difficulty of recording small amounts of time for payroll purposes.' " Ibid. (quoting Lindow v. United States , 738 F.2d 1057 , 1062 (9th Cir. 1984) ); see also 29 C.F.R. § 785.47 ("In recording working time under the [FLSA], insubstantial or insignificant periods of time beyond the scheduled working hours, which cannot as a practical administrative matter be precisely recorded for payroll purposes , may be disregarded. The courts have held that such trifles are de minimis. ") (emphasis added). Thus, "[w]hen evaluating whether work performed by an employee is de minimis , courts typically consider the amount of time spent on the extra work, the practical administrative difficulties of recording additional time, the regularity with which the additional work is performed, and the aggregate amount of compensable time.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lyons v. Conagra Foods Packaged Foods LLC · Singer v. Reg'l Transp. Auth. & Pace Suburban Bus Serv.