green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
9.3 score
“ven if the employer shows both subjective good faith and objectively reasonable grounds for believing that its actions were not in violation of the statute, remission of liquidated damages remains within the sound discretion of the trial court.”
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 33 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Theisen v. City of Maple Grove
ven if the employer shows both subjective good faith and objectively reasonable grounds for believing that its actions were not in violation of the statute, remission of liquidated damages remains within the sound discretion of the trial court.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Pima County v. State
A court must thus decide if the acts of the state officer — here, the auditor general— “contain a matter which is properly to be regarded as legislative in character and effect.” Id. at 580, (quoting INS v. Cha-dha, 462 U.S, 919, 103 S.Ct. 2764 , 77 L.Ed.2d 317 (1983)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bateson v. Geisse
Rather, it was directed specifically and solely at a single individual: Gerald Bateson. “[A]n act which applies generally to the community is a legislative one, while an act directed at one or a few individuals is an executive one.” Id. at 579.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bateson v. Geisse
Rather, it was directed specifically and solely at a single individual: Gerald Bateson. "[A]n act which applies generally to the community is a legislative one, while an act directed at one or a few individuals is an executive one." Id. at 579.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Breck v. Ulmer
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Rather, “[w]hether actions ... are, in law and fact, an exercise of legislative power depends not on their form but upon ‘whether they contain matter which is regarded as legislative in its character and effect.’ ” “The essentials of the legislative function are the determination of the legislative policy and its formulation and promulgation as a defined and binding rule of conduct.” Id. at 579-80 (emphasis added, citations and footnotes omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Helmert v. Butterball, LLC
See Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 750 F.2d 47 , 50 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Dunlop v. City Elec., Inc., 527 F.2d 394, 398 (5th Cir.1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Boudreaux v. Banctec, Inc.
See Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 750 F.2d 47 , 50 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Gabriel Alvarez, Individually and as Class Representative Ranulfo Gutierrez, Individually and as Class Representative Pedro Hernandez, Individually and as Class Representative Maria Martinez Ramon Moreno Ismael Rodriquez v. Ibp, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Gabriel Alvarez, Individually and as Class Representative Ranulfo Gutierrez, Individually and as Class Representative Pedro Hernandez, Individually and as Class Representative Maria Martinez Ramon Moreno Ismael Rodriquez v. Ibp, Inc., a Delaware Corporation
See Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 750 F.2d 47 , 50 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Dunlop v. City Elec., Inc., 527 F.2d 394, 398 (5th Cir.1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alvarez v. IBP, Inc.
See Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 750 F.2d 47 , 50 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Dunlop v. City Elec., Inc., 527 F.2d 394, 398 (5th Cir.1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Opinion No.
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427 , 432 (8th Cir. 1984) (no expectancy created by governmental agent exceeding bounds of authority), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985). 767 F.2d at 474 . 3 The passage just quoted is difficult to reconcile with the earlier passage from Wilson .
cited
Cited "see"
Teague v. Mosley
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 580 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Aldrich v. Knab
See Cinevision Corp. v. Burbank, 745 F.2d 560 , 568 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Kreimer v. Bureau of Police, 958 F.2d 1242 , 1250-55 (3rd Cir.1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Manders v. Brown
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 579 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Friedrich v. Computer Services
See Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728, 739 , 101 S.Ct. 1437, 1444 , 67 L.Ed.2d 641 (1981), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Friedrich v. U.S. Computer Services
See Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728, 739 , 101 S.Ct. 1437, 1444 , 67 L.Ed.2d 641 (1981), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Johnson v. Reno Police Chief
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1984). .
cited
Cited "see"
Toni O'Brien v. City of Greers Ferry, Jack McKinney Mayor, Harley Cosby, Alderman, in Their Individual and Official Capacities, Toni O'Brien v. City of Greers Ferry, Jack McKinney Mayor, Harley Cosby, Alderman, in Their Individual and Official Capacities
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 577-80 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
O'Brien v. City of Greers Ferry
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 577-80 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
St. Paul Ramsey County Medical Center v. Pennington County
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427, 438 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
St. Paul Ramsey County Medical Center, a Minnesota Hospital v. Pennington County, South Dakota, and Moody County, South Dakota, St. Paul Ramsey County Medical Center, a Minnesota Hospital v. Pennington County, South Dakota, and Moody County, South Dakota, St. Paul Ramsey County Medical Center, a Minnesota Hospital v. Pennington County, South Dakota, and Moody County, South Dakota
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427, 438 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rock Against Racism v. Ward
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 567 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Davenport v. City of Alexandria, 710 F.2d 148 , 150 n. 6 (4th Cir.1983) (en banc); Goldstein v. Town of Nantucket, 477 F.Supp. 606, 608 (D.Mass.1979); see also Tele-Communications of Key West, Inc. v. United States, 757 F.2d 1330, 1337 (D.C.Cir.1985) (packaging and transmitting television programs, even without original production, protected by first amendment). 11 Under certain circumstances, the city has the right to regulate expressive conduct whic…
discussed
Cited "see"
Rock Against Racism v. Ward
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 567 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Davenport v. City of Alexandria, 710 F.2d 148 , 150 n. 6 (4th Cir.1983) (en banc); Goldstein v. Town of Nantucket, 477 F.Supp. 606, 608 (D.Mass.1979); see also Tele-Communications of Key West, Inc. v. United States, 151 F.2d 1330, 1337 (D.C.Cir.1985) (packaging and transmitting television programs, even without original production, protected by first amendment).
cited
Cited "see"
Stow v. Cochran
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427 , 431-32 & n. 2 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Horton v. Taylor, 767 F.2d 471, 474 (8th Cir.1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Stow v. Cochran
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427 , 431-32 & n. 2 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Horton v. Taylor, 767 F.2d 471, 474 (8th Cir.1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kuchka v. Kile
See Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985) citing Rogin v. Bensalem Township, 616 F.2d 680 (3d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 1029 , 101 S.Ct. 1737 , 68 L.Ed.2d 223 (1981) (general statements of township policy are legislative acts; specific applications of policy to a particular plant owner are administrative acts).
cited
Cited "see"
Horton v. Taylor
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427, 432 (8th Cir.1984) (no expectancy created by governmental agent exceeding bounds of authority), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Horton v. Taylor
See Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427, 432 (8th Cir.1984) (no expectancy created by governmental agent exceeding bounds of authority), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kamplain v. Curry County Board of Commissioners
See Bogan, — U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 973 (“Whether an act is legislative turns on the nature of the act, rather than on the motive or intent of the official performing it.”); see also Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 579 (9th Cir.1984) (“The critical concern in our inquiry [is] the nature of the action on which the vote was taken.”), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985). “‘The essentials of the legislative function are the determination of the legislative policy and its formulation and promulgation as a defined and binding rule of …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kamplain v. Curry County Board Of Commissioners
See Bogan, 523 U.S. at ----, 118 S.Ct. at 973 ("Whether an act is legislative turns on the nature of the act, rather than on the motive or intent of the official performing it."); see also Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank, 745 F.2d 560, 579 (9th Cir.1984) ("The critical concern in our inquiry [is] the nature of the action on which the vote was taken."), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2115 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985). " 'The essentials of the legislative function are the determination of the legislative policy and its formulation and promulgation as a defined and binding rule of conduct…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Albanese v. Bergen County
Compare Mitchell v. King Packing Co., 350 U.S. 260, 263 , 76 S.Ct. 337, 339 , 100 L.Ed. 282 (1956) (ruling that butchers for meat packing company should be compensated for time spent sharpening knives prior to and after work and during -lunch hours because that activity was indispensable and integral to their principle activities), and Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Syst., Inc., 750 F.2d 47, 50-51 (8th Cir.1984) (finding that truck drivers were entitled to compensation for time spent driving company trucks for repairs prior to departing on freight haulage route), cert denied, 471 U.S. 105…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
USM Workers' Committee v. Decker (In Re USM Technology Corp.)
See also, Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 750 F.2d 47 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 , 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985); Morelock v. NCR Corp., 546 F.2d 682, 688 (6th Cir.1976), vacated on other grounds, 435 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 1463 , 55 L.Ed.2d 503 (1978); Wirtz v. Jones, 340 F.2d 901, 903-05 (5th Cir.1965); Avitia v. Metropolitan Club of Chicago, Inc., 731 F.Supp. 872 (N.D.Ill.1990); EEOC v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 365 F.Supp. 1105 (E.D.Pa.1973), aff'd, 506 F.2d 735 (3d Cir.1974).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Joseph F. Moore v. Warwick Public School District No. 29, a Public Corporation
See also Smith v. Sorensen, 748 F.2d 427, 435-36 (8th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 105 S.Ct. 2116 , 85 L.Ed.2d 480 (1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
City of Burbank
v.
Cinevision Corp.
v.
Cinevision Corp.
No. 84-1389.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 22, 1985.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: D. Minnesota (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.