Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 35 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Neal Goulas v. Lagreca Services, Incorporated, et.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Neal Goulas v. Lagreca Services, Incorporated, et Anchor | green | “despite the inclusion of manual labor in his regular duties” | 5 |
| 2 | Donald Allen v. Coil Tubing Services, L.L.C | green | “also performed manual labor alongside the technicians he supervised while in the field” | 5 |
| 3 | Matthew Dewan v. M-I, L.L.C. | green | “oversee oil transfers, 'monitor the loading and unloading of cargo,' and reported on the transfer's compliance with company policies and national safety standards.” | 5 |
| 4 | Daniel Smith v. Ochsner Health System | green | “office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer,” | 5 |
| 5 | Daniel Smith v. Ochsner Health System | green | “spent literal procurement time on the ground, taking a team to the airport, going into the operating room, and reporting back to the coordinator and surgeon in louisiana.” | 5 |
| 6 | Hobbs v. EVO | green | “translated their observations into advice or recommendations regarding what the client could or should do with the well . . . likely because the recommendations, even non-final ones, were beyond the field engineer's limited expertise.104 the court noted that providing "some sort…” | 5 |
| 7 | Hewitt v. Helix Engy Solutions Grp | green | “a strong indicator of an employee's exempt status, thus eliminating 75 hewitt, 15 f.4th at 297 . 76 29 c.f.r. 541.604 (a). 77 29 c.f.r. 541.601 (a). 78 29 c.f.r. 541.601 (d). the need for a detailed analysis of the employee's job duties.” | 5 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.