§

DeCoster Egg Farms

223 N.L.R.B. 884 (N.L.R.B. 1976)
DeCoster Egg Farms

5 Cited authorities

  1. Farmers Irrigation Co. v. McComb

    337 U.S. 755 (1949)   Cited 145 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Farmers Reservoir, for example, the Supreme Court concluded that "the physical operation, control and maintenance" of "canals, reservoirs, and headgates" for a company that stored water and distributed it to farms through the company's canals were activities "[c]learly... not done on a farm."

  2. Mitchell v. Huntsville Wholesale Nurseries

    267 F.2d 286 (5th Cir. 1959)   Cited 28 times
    Holding that the processing by a farmer of commodities of other farmers is incidental to, or in conjunction with, the farming operations of those other farmers and therefore not within the definition of agriculture

  3. Mitchell v. Hunt

    263 F.2d 913 (5th Cir. 1959)   Cited 21 times
    Considering the FLSA's exemption for agricultural employees and stating: "To bring himself within the exception, the appellee must prove that not merely some but substantially all of the farming operations to which the practices are incident were operations of the appellee farmer himself."

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Bayside Enterprises, Inc.

    527 F.2d 436 (1st Cir. 1975)   Cited 1 times

    No. 75-1070. Argued October 7, 1975. Decided December 10, 1975. Robert A. Giannasi, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., with whom John C. Miller, Acting Gen. Counsel, John S. Irving, Deputy Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, and Elinor Hadley Stillman, Atty., Washington, D.C., were on brief for petitioner. Alan J. Levenson, Portland, Me., with whom Clarke C. Hambley, Jr., and Levenson Levenson, Portland, Me., were on brief for respondents. Before COFFIN, Chief Judge, McENTEE

  5. Section 780.141 - Practices must relate to farming operations on the particular farm

    29 C.F.R. § 780.141   Cited 9 times
    Identifying practices lacking the necessary connection