29 C.F.R. § 779.24

Retail or service establishment

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

In the 1949 amendments to the Act, the term “retail or service establishment”, which was not previously defined in the law, was given a special definition for purposes of the Act. The legislative history of the 1961 and the 1966 amendments to the Act, which use the same term in a number of provisions relating to coverage and exemptions, indicates that no different meaning was intended by the term “retail or service establishment” as used in the new provisions from that already established by the Act's definition. On the contrary, the existing definition was reenacted in section 13(a)(2) of the Act as amended in 1961 and 1966 as follows: “A ‘retail or service establishment’ shall mean an establishment 75 per centum of whose annual dollar volume of sales of goods or services (or of both) is not for resale and is recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry”. The application of this definition, which has had much judicial construction since its original enactment, is considered at length in subpart D of this part. As is apparent from the quoted language, not every establishment which engages in retail selling of goods or services will constitute a “retail or service establishment” within the meaning of the Act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1975–2024 · leading case: Gatto v. Mortgage Specialists of Illinois, Inc.
Gatto v. Mortgage Specialists of Illinois, Inc. (2006) ilnd · cites it 3× “29 C.F.R. § 779.24 ; Reich v. Delcorp, 3 F.”
Alvarado v. Corporate Cleaning Service, Inc. (2010) ilnd · cites it 2× “; see also 29 C.F.R. § 779.24 . The Department of Labor (“DOL”) promulgated regulations interpreting the term "retail or service establishment” based on the definition in § 213(a)(2).”
Peter J. Brennan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Goose Creek Consolidated Independent School D (1975) ca5 · cites it 2× “refers to a 'distinct physical place of business' rather than to 'an entire business or enterprise' which may include several separate places of business" (29 C.F.R. 779.24). Later in 29 C.F.R. 779.”
Liger v. NEW ORLEANS HORNETS NBA LTD. PARTNERSHIP (2008) laed “” 29 C.F.R. § 779.24 . The Department of Labor regulations provide excellent guidance for determining whether a particular employer may claim the “retail or service establishment” exemption.”
Brock v. POSITIVE CHANGES HYPNOSIS, LLC (2008) tnwd “, FLSA Retail or Service Establishment, 29 C.F.R. § 779.24 (1970); Tenn.Code Ann.”
Burden v. Selectquote Insurance Services (2012) cand “See 29 C.F.R. §§ 779.24 , 779.312, 779.411. 7 The DOL’s interpretive regulations identify three characteristics of a retail or service establishment: (1) it typically “sells goods or services to the general public,” (2) “serves the everyday needs of the community in which it is…”
Noe v. Smart Mortgage Centers, Inc. (2024) ilnd · cites it 2× “2006) (citing 29 C.F.R. § 779.24 ). But Congress later repealed 17 § 213(a)(2), which exempted intrastate businesses from the overtime and minimum wage requirements under the FLSA.”
Jackson v. R & A Towing, LLC (2023) txsd “; see also 29 C.F.R. § 779.24 . Determining whether a business fits the retail concept can be difficult because “a precise line cannot be drawn and exact objective standards cannot be established.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.