33 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 236,174 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 113,103 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co.
486 U.S. 128 (1988) Cited 1,951 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "plain language" of the Fair Labor Standards Act's "willful" liquidated damages standard requires that "the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for the matter of whether its conduct was prohibited by the statute," without regard to the outrageousness of the conduct at issue
Ragas v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.
136 F.3d 455 (5th Cir. 1998) Cited 2,753 times
Holding that a party opposing summary judgment is required to identify specific evidence in the record and articulate the precise manner in which that evidence supports her claim
Wallace v. Texas Tech Univ
80 F.3d 1042 (5th Cir. 1996) Cited 1,425 times
Holding that Texas Tech and Texas Tech employees enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity respectively against § 1981 claims
Singer v. City of Waco
324 F.3d 813 (5th Cir. 2003) Cited 370 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the city could establish a 207(k) work period by following one
James by James v. Sadler
909 F.2d 834 (5th Cir. 1990) Cited 305 times
Holding that Mississippi's three-year "residual" period applies
Cheatham v. Allstate Ins. Co.
465 F.3d 578 (5th Cir. 2006) Cited 158 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that exemption covered adjusters who “advised the management, represented Allstate, and negotiated on Allstate's behalf”
Roe-Midgett v. CC Services, Inc.
512 F.3d 865 (7th Cir. 2008) Cited 113 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that administrative exemption covered material-damage appraisers responsible for “investigating auto accident damage, making repair or replacement determinations, drafting estimates, and settling claims of up to $12,000 where liability has been established and coverage approved”
Mireles v. Frio Foods, Inc.
899 F.2d 1407 (5th Cir. 1990) Cited 150 times
Holding that when employees were ordered to report to work at a certain time, but were made to wait fifteen minutes per day before actually beginning productive work, they were engaged to wait and the wait time was not de minimis
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,681 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 201 - Short title
29 U.S.C. § 201 Cited 20,915 times 102 Legal Analyses
Setting fourteen as the minimum age for most non-agricultural work
Section 255 - Statute of limitations
29 U.S.C. § 255 Cited 4,536 times 8 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that not all FLSA wage and overtime claims are willful
Section 4201.252 - Personnel
Tex. Ins. Code § 4201.252 Cited 1 times
(a) Personnel employed by or under contract with a utilization review agent to perform utilization review must be appropriately trained and qualified and meet the requirements of this chapter and other applicable law, including applicable licensing requirements. (b) Personnel, other than a physician licensed to practice medicine, who obtain oral or written information directly from a patient's physician or other health care provider regarding the patient's specific medical condition, diagnosis, or
Section 4201.153 - Screening Criteria and Review Procedures
Tex. Ins. Code § 4201.153
(a) A utilization review agent shall use written medically acceptable screening criteria and review procedures that are established and periodically evaluated and updated with appropriate involvement from physicians, including practicing physicians, dentists, and other health care providers. (b) A utilization review determination shall be made in accordance with currently accepted medical or health care practices, taking into account special circumstances of the case that may require deviation from
Section 541.200 - General rule for administrative employees
29 C.F.R. § 541.200 Cited 894 times 92 Legal Analyses
Providing that the administrative exemption can also apply if the employee’s primary duty is directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer’s customers
Section 541.700 - Primary duty
29 C.F.R. § 541.700 Cited 781 times 60 Legal Analyses
Providing that determining an employee's "primary duty" requires analysis of "all the facts in a particular case," looking to the "principal, main, major or most important duty that the employee performs"
Section 541.201 - Directly related to management or general business operations
29 C.F.R. § 541.201 Cited 480 times 74 Legal Analyses
Listing examples of the functional areas related to "management or general business operations"
Section 541.202 - Discretion and independent judgment
29 C.F.R. § 541.202 Cited 453 times 57 Legal Analyses
Regarding review by supervisors
Section 541.301 - Learned professionals
29 C.F.R. § 541.301 Cited 193 times 38 Legal Analyses
Stating that "bookkeepers . . . generally will not qualify as exempt professionals."
Section 541.600 - Amount of salary required
29 C.F.R. § 541.600 Cited 135 times 29 Legal Analyses
(a) To qualify as an exempt executive, administrative or professional employee under section 13(a)(1) of the Act, an employee must be compensated on a salary basis at a rate of not less than $684 per week (or $455 per week if employed in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands by employers other than the Federal Government, or $380 per week if employed in American Samoa by employers other than the Federal Government), exclusive of board, lodging
Section 541.708 - Combination exemptions
29 C.F.R. § 541.708 Cited 73 times 3 Legal Analyses
Recognizing combination exemptions for "[e]mployees who perform a combination of exempt duties as set forth in the regulations in this part for executive, administrative . . . employees"
Section 541.704 - Use of manuals
29 C.F.R. § 541.704 Cited 37 times 4 Legal Analyses
Noting "employees who simply apply well-established techniques or procedures described in manuals or other sources within closely prescribed limits to determine the correct response to an inquiry or set of circumstances" are not exempt

Clark et al v. Centene Corporation et al

33 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Holding that a party opposing summary judgment is required to identify specific evidence in the record and articulate the precise manner in which that evidence supports her claim

Holding that Texas Tech and Texas Tech employees enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity respectively against § 1981 claims

Holding that the city could establish a 207(k) work period by following one

Holding that Mississippi's three-year "residual" period applies

Holding that exemption covered adjusters who “advised the management, represented Allstate, and negotiated on Allstate's behalf”

Holding that administrative exemption covered material-damage appraisers responsible for “investigating auto accident damage, making repair or replacement determinations, drafting estimates, and settling claims of up to $12,000 where liability has been established and coverage approved”

Holding that when employees were ordered to report to work at a certain time, but were made to wait fifteen minutes per day before actually beginning productive work, they were engaged to wait and the wait time was not de minimis

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Setting fourteen as the minimum age for most non-agricultural work

Recognizing that not all FLSA wage and overtime claims are willful

Providing that the administrative exemption can also apply if the employee’s primary duty is directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer’s customers

Providing that determining an employee's "primary duty" requires analysis of "all the facts in a particular case," looking to the "principal, main, major or most important duty that the employee performs"

Listing examples of the functional areas related to "management or general business operations"

Regarding review by supervisors

Stating that "bookkeepers . . . generally will not qualify as exempt professionals."

Recognizing combination exemptions for "[e]mployees who perform a combination of exempt duties as set forth in the regulations in this part for executive, administrative . . . employees"

Noting "employees who simply apply well-established techniques or procedures described in manuals or other sources within closely prescribed limits to determine the correct response to an inquiry or set of circumstances" are not exempt