974 F. Supp. 2d 162 - Sethi v. Narod’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 203 · 29 U.S.C. § 207 · 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he statute provides an empty guarantee absent a financial incentive for indi viduals with control, even in the form of delegated authority, to comply with the law, and courts have continually emphasized the extraordinarily generous interpretation the statute is to be given. Nor is “only evidence indicating [an individual’s] direct control over the [plaintiff employees] [to] be considered.” Instead, “evidence showing [an individual’s] authority over management, supervision, and oversight of [a company’s] affairs in general” is relevant to “the totality of the circumstances in determining [the individual’s] operational control of [the company’s] employment of [the plaintiff employees].””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““(1) Where there is an arrangement between the employers to share the employee’s services, as, for example, to interchange employees; or (2) Where one employer is acting directly or indirectly in the interest of the other employer (or employers) in relation to the employee; or (3) Where the employers are not completely disassociated with respect to the employment of a particular employee and may be deemed to share control of the employee, directly or indirectly, by reason of the fact that one employer controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the other employer.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Teri v. Spinelli“any person ... employing any individual in any”
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.