§Why CasetextPricing

Rapczynski et al v. Directv, Inc. et al

MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff Stephen Rydzanich

54 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 236,238 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"

  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 216,328 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  3. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

    475 U.S. 574 (1986)   Cited 113,131 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

  4. McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co.

    486 U.S. 128 (1988)   Cited 1,952 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

  5. Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.

    328 U.S. 680 (1946)   Cited 2,584 times   58 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, where employer's records are inadequate, "an employee has carried out his burden if he proves that he has in fact performed work for which he was improperly compensated and if he produces sufficient evidence to show the amount and extent of that work as a matter of just and reasonable inference."

  6. Thompson v. Real Estate Mortg. Network

    748 F.3d 142 (3d Cir. 2014)   Cited 503 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court may have been "correct" in not finding a "joint employment" relationship "if one considers only the name of the payor appearing on [plaintiff]'s pay stubs. But [plaintiff] alleges more. The Amended Complaint states that an employee of [defendant] conducted Thompson's training . . . indicating that [defendant] had at least some authority to 'promulgate work rules and assignments'"

  7. Zheng v. Liberty Apparel Co. Inc.

    355 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 2003)   Cited 569 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court erred in applying only four factors regarding formal control

  8. De Asencio v. Tyson Foods, Inc.

    342 F.3d 301 (3d Cir. 2003)   Cited 548 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that late strategic efforts by the plaintiff weigh against a court exercising supplemental jurisdiction

  9. Bonnette v. Calif. Health and Welfare Agency

    704 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1983)   Cited 533 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that state and county agencies were employers of in-home chore workers who alleged violations of minimum wage provisions

  10. Hickton v. Enter. Holdings, Inc. (In re Enter. Rent–A–Car Wage & Hour Emp't Practices Litig.)

    683 F.3d 462 (3d Cir. 2012)   Cited 212 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding an alleged employer must exercise "significant control" to be considered a joint employer under the FLSA

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,775 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 201 - Short title

    29 U.S.C. § 201   Cited 20,928 times   102 Legal Analyses
    Setting fourteen as the minimum age for most non-agricultural work

  13. Section 207 - Maximum hours

    29 U.S.C. § 207   Cited 10,466 times   225 Legal Analyses
    Establishing overtime rules

  14. Section 206 - Minimum wage

    29 U.S.C. § 206   Cited 8,816 times   98 Legal Analyses
    Asking only whether the alleged inequality resulted from “any other factor other than sex”

  15. Section 203 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 203   Cited 6,791 times   274 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that "custom or practice" under a collective-bargaining agreement can make changing clothes noncompensable

  16. Section 255 - Statute of limitations

    29 U.S.C. § 255   Cited 4,537 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that not all FLSA wage and overtime claims are willful

  17. Section 779.318 - Characteristics and examples of retail or service establishments

    29 C.F.R. § 779.318   Cited 80 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that, as it pertains to the Fair Labor Standards Act, "[t]ypically a retail or service establishment is one which sells goods or services to the general public. It serves the everyday needs of the community in which it is located. The retail or service establishment performs a function in the business organization of the Nation which is at the very end of the stream of distribution, disposing in small quantities of the products and skills of such organization and does not take part in the manufacturing process."

  18. Section 779.411 - Employee of a "retail or service establishment"

    29 C.F.R. § 779.411   Cited 39 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that, for purposes of section 7, the definition of "retail or service establishment" is found in repealed section 13 of the FLSA

  19. Section 779.419 - Dependence of the section 7(i) overtime pay exemption upon the level of the employee's "regular rate" of pay

    29 C.F.R. § 779.419   Cited 38 times

    (a) If more than half of the compensation of an employee of a retail or service establishment for a representative period as previously explained represents commissions on goods or services, one additional condition must be met in order for the employee to be exempt under section 7(i) from the overtime pay requirement of section 7(a) of the Act in a workweek when his hours of work exceed the maximum number specified in section (a). This additional condition is that his "regular rate" of pay for such

  20. Section 778.120 - Deferred commission payments not identifiable as earned in particular workweeks

    29 C.F.R. § 778.120   Cited 21 times

    If it is not possible or practicable to allocate the commission among the workweeks of the period in proportion to the amount of commission actually earned or reasonably presumed to be earned each week, some other reasonable and equitable method must be adopted. The following methods may be used: (a)Allocation of equal amounts to each week. Assume that the employee earned an equal amount of commission in each week of the commission computation period and compute any additional overtime compensation

  21. Section 779.302 - Exemptions depend on character of establishment

    29 C.F.R. § 779.302   Cited 11 times

    Some exemptions depend on the character of the establishment by which an employee is employed. These include the "retail or service establishment" exemptions in sections 13(a) (2), (4), and (11) and the exemptions available to the establishments of the character specified in sections 13(a) (3), (9), and 13(b)(8) (first part). Therefore, if the establishment meets the tests enumerated in these sections, employees "employed by" that establishment are generally exempt from sections 6 and 7. (See §§