green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
13.1 score
“the requirements under the mwhl mirror those of the federal law; as such, claim under the mwhl stands or falls on the success of their claim under the flsa.”
Treatment trajectory · 2008 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2008
2017
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
DEMARCO v. FARMACEUTICALRX, LLC
eference is properly given to the federal interpretation.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Nancy Livi v. Hyatt Hotels Corp
this analysis applies equally to the flsa and pmwa claims, given the similarities between the in each statute.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Hickman v. TL Transp., LLC
the requirements under the mwhl mirror those of the federal law; as such, claim under the mwhl stands or falls on the success of their claim under the flsa.
discussed
Cited "see"
SUMMERS v. TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKETS, LLC
See Department of Labor and Industry, Bureau of Labor Law Compliance v. Stuber, 822 A.2d 870 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003), aff’d, 859 A.2d 1253 (Pa. 2004) (citing Commonwealth v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 527 A.2d 1097 3 “Under the so-called ‘long’ test, individuals who were paid on a salary basis of not less than $100 per week [sufficient to satisfy Section (f)] also needed to satisfy all of the requirements set forth in Sections (a) through (e) [hence the ‘long’ designation].” (ECF No. 33 at 10.) 4 “Under the alternate ‘short’ test [which is contained entirely within Sect…
discussed
Cited "see"
Ford v. Lehigh Valley Restaurant Group Inc.
(2×)
See Com., Department of Labor and Industry v. Stuber, 822 A.2d 870, 873 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (stating that “it is proper to give deference to federal interpretation of a federal statute when the state statute substantially parallels it”), aff’d, 580 Pa. 66 , 859 A.2d 1253 (2004).
discussed
Cited "see"
Albert Itterly v. Family Dollar Stores
(2×)
See Commonwealth v. Stuber, 822 A.2d 870, 873 (Pa.Cmwlth.Ct.2003), aff’d, 580 Pa. 66 , 859 A.2d 1253 (2004) (applying "federal case law” regarding the FLSA to a PMWA claim). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Marshall v. Commonwealth
(2×)
See Dep’t of Labor & Indus., Bureau of Labor Law Compliance v. Stuber, 822 A.2d 870 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003), aff'd, 580 Pa. 66 , 859 A.2d 1253 (2004); Riedel v. Human Relations Comm’n of Reading, 756 A.2d 142 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000); Gosewisch v. Dep’t of Revenue, 40 Pa.Cmwlth. 565 , 397 A.2d 1288 (1979). .
examined
Cited "see"
Bayada Nurses, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Labor & Industry
(4×)
See Department of Labor and Industry, Bureau of Labor Law Compliance v. Stuber, 822 A.2d 870 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003), aff'd, 580 Pa. 66 , 859 A.2d 1253 (2004) (stating that deference is given federal interpretation of federal statute when state statute substantially parallels federal statute).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Department of Labor and Industry, Bureau of Labor Law Compliance, O/B/O Lynndon Hubler, Appellees,
v.
Wayne STUBER, Individually and D/B/A C-Wayne Fixtures, Appellant
v.
Wayne STUBER, Individually and D/B/A C-Wayne Fixtures, Appellant
Appeal 12 WAP 2004.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Oct 20, 2004.
F. Cortez Bell, III, Esq., Clearfield, for Wayne Stuber, individually and d/b/a C-Wayne Fixtures., Kathryn J. McDermott, Esq., Harrisburg, for Bureau of Labor Law Compliance.
Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor, Eakin, Baer.
Cited by 25 opinions | Published
[*67] ORDER
PER CURIAM.AND NOW, this 20th day of October, 2004, the order of the Commonwealth Court is hereby AFFIRMED, on the basis of the Commonwealth Court opinion, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Bureau of Labor Law Compliance v. Wayne Stuber, 822 A.2d 870 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003).