Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 950 F.2d 590 - Frank v. McQuigg

Frank v. McQuigg’s Empirical Analysis

950 F.2d 590 · 1991

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 2017

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

110199120002010decided

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

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Pelaes v. United States · Truong Dinh Hung v. United States · Walling US v. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Co

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

  1. “[N]o employer shall be subject to any liability or punishment for or on account of the failure of the employer to pay ... overtime compensation under the [FLSA] ... if he pleads and proves that the act or omission complained of was in good faith in conformity with and in reliance on any written administrative regulation, order, ruling, approval, or interpretation, of [the relevant USDOL administrator], or any administrative practice or enforcement policy of such agency....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “no employer shall be subject to any liability or punishment for or on account of the failure of the employer to pay minimum wages or overtime compensation under the [FLSA] if he pleads and proves that the act or omission complained of was in good faith in conformity with and in reliance on any written administrative regulation, order, ruling, approval, or interpretation, of the [DOL], or any administrative practice or enforcement policy of such agency with respect to the class of employers to which he belonged. Such a defense, if established, shall be a bar to the action or proceeding, notwithstanding that after such act or omission, such administrative regulation, order, ruling, approval, interpretation, practice, or enforcement policy is modified or rescinded or is determined by judicial authority to be invalid or of no legal effect.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The Portal Act and its regulations strongly imply that an employer who relied on and conforms to an Opinion Letter which specifically address him and his circumstances is acting in good faith.”
    1 later decision 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.