Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 939 F.2d 614 - Murray v. Stuckey's, Inc.

Murray v. Stuckey's, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

939 F.2d 614 · 1991

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
3
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Morgan v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc. (2008), Shockley v. City of Newport News (1993)

18 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 state decisions

250199120002010decided

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.

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 207 · 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 29 U.S.C. § 216 · 29 U.S.C. § 255

Relies on Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. · Donovan v. Burger King Corp. · Donovan v. Burger King Corp.

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

  1. “is not a controlling factor under the regulations”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “whose primary duty consists of the management of the enterprise in which the employee is employed or of a customarily recognized department or subdivision thereof, and includes the customary and regular direction of the work of two or more other employees therein.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(a) Section 541.1(d) requires that an exempt executive employee customarily and regularly exercise discretionary powers. A person whose work is so completely routinized that he has no discretion does not qualify for exemption, (b) The phrase “customarily and regularly” signifies a frequency which must be greater than occasional but which, of course, may be less than constant. The requirement will be met by the employee who normally and recurrently is called upon to exercise and does exercise discretionary powers in the day-to-day performance of his duties. The requirement is not met by the occasional exercise of discretionary powers.”
    2 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.