§Why CasetextPricing

Thomas et al v. Bayou Fox, Inc. (Joint Assign)

REPLY BRIEF re MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

27 Cited authorities

  1. Teague v. Lane

    489 U.S. 288 (1989)   Cited 7,779 times   99 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the rule announced in Taylor v. Louisiana requiring the jury venire be drawn from a fair cross section of the community is procedural and does not apply retroactively

  2. Auer v. Robbins

    519 U.S. 452 (1997)   Cited 2,374 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"

  3. Lundy v. Catholic Health Sys. of Long Island Inc.

    711 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 1,016 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an agency relationship requires pleading of facts showing that agent "had apparent or actual authority to bind" principal, and mere conclusory statements of agency status are insufficient to state a claim

  4. Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp.

    571 U.S. 220 (2014)   Cited 240 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding the narrow-construction principle inapplicable to a definitions provision regarding doffing clothing because narrowly construed exemptions "generally reside in § 213, which is entitled ‘Exemptions' and classifies certain kinds of workers as uncovered by various provisions"

  5. Fast v. Applebee's Intern. Inc.

    638 F.3d 872 (8th Cir. 2011)   Cited 143 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that its decision was not determining whether the duties alleged were tipped or non-tipped duties, just that the FOH interpretation of the FLSA governed the case

  6. Young v. Fire Ins. Exchange

    338 U.S. 912 (1950)   Cited 214 times
    Holding that the denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari does not support the conclusion that either the majority or the dissent at the prior levels correctly applied the law

  7. Adair v. City of Kirkland

    185 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 111 times
    Holding that a district court did not err in applying a similar approach

  8. United States v. Carver

    260 U.S. 482 (1923)   Cited 266 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that denial of the writ "imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case, as the bar has been told many times"

  9. Lentz v. Spanky's Rest. II, Inc.

    491 F. Supp. 2d 663 (N.D. Tex. 2007)   Cited 60 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding the plaintiff did not establish he was similarly situated where the defendant produced evidence that as a head waiter he had different job duties than other wait staff

  10. Mechmet v. Four Seasons Hotels, Ltd.

    825 F.2d 1173 (7th Cir. 1987)   Cited 108 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a non-discretionary percentage charge is not a tip

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 162,084 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  12. Section 207 - Maximum hours

    29 U.S.C. § 207   Cited 10,748 times   231 Legal Analyses
    Establishing overtime rules

  13. Section 203 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 203   Cited 6,971 times   280 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that "custom or practice" under a collective-bargaining agreement can make changing clothes noncompensable

  14. Section 531.56 - "More than $30 a month in tips."

    29 C.F.R. § 531.56   Cited 69 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Describing employees working "dual jobs"

  15. Section 776.4 - Workweek standard

    29 C.F.R. § 776.4   Cited 41 times

    (a) The workweek is to be taken as the standard in determining the applicability of the Act. Thus, if in any workweek an employee is engaged in both covered and noncovered work he is entitled to both the wage and hours benefits of the Act for all the time worked in that week, unless exempted therefrom by some specific provision of the Act. The proportion of his time spent by the employee in each type of work is not material. If he spends any part of the workweek in covered work he will be considered

  16. Section 531.51 - Conditions for taking tip credits in making wage payments

    29 C.F.R. § 531.51   Cited 21 times

    The wage credit permitted on account of tips under section 3(m)(2)(A) may be taken only with respect to wage payments made under the Act to those employees whose occupations in the workweeks for which such payments are made are those of "tipped employees" as defined in section 3(t). Under section 3(t), the occupation of the employee must be one "in which he customarily and regularly receives more than $30 a month in tips." To determine whether a tip credit may be taken in paying wages to a particular