C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER V—WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › SUBCHAPTER B—STATEMENTS OF GENERAL POLICY OR INTERPRETATION NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO REGULATIONS › PART 779—THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT AS APPLIED TO RETAILERS OF GOODS OR SERVICES › Subpart C—Employment to Which the Act May Apply; Enterprise Coverage

29 C.F.R. § 779.242

Goods that “have been moved in” commerce

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

For the purpose of section 3(s), goods will be considered to “have been moved * * * in commerce” when they have moved across State lines before they are handled, sold, or otherwise worked on by the employees. It is immaterial in such a case that the goods may have “come to rest” within the meaning of the term “in commerce” as interpreted in other respects, before they are handled, sold, or otherwise worked on by the employees in the enterprise. Such movement in commerce may take place before they have reached the enterprise, or within the enterprise, such as from a warehouse of the enterprise in one State to a retail store of the same enterprise located in another State. Thus, employees will be considered to be “handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in * * * commerce” where they are engaged in the described activities on “goods” that have moved across State lines at any time in the course of business, such as from the manufacturer to the distributor, or to the “enterprise,” or from one establishment to another within the “enterprise.” See the general discussion in part 776 of this chapter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1968–2022 · leading case: Polycarpe v. E&S Landscaping Serv., Inc., 616 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Polycarpe v. E&S Landscaping Serv., Inc., 616 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2010). “See also 29 C.F.R. § 779.242 (stating that it is “immaterial .”
Ray Donovan, Sec'y of Labor, United States Dep't of Labor v. Larry Scoles, Individually, & Doing Bus. as Coll. Exxon Serv. Station, 652 F.2d 16 (9th Cir. 1981). · cites it 2× “The report reasoned that since the FLSA covered those employees producing goods for sale in interstate commerce and those transporting the goods, it was appropriate to extend protection to the “employees of the retail selling enterprise .”
Wirtz v. Melos Constr. Corp., 284 F. Supp. 717 (E.D.N.Y 1968). “Thus, employees will be considered to be ‘handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in * * * commerce’ where they are engaged in the described activities on ‘goods’ that have moved across State lines at any time in the course of business, such as from…”
Wirtz v. Melos Constr. Corp., 408 F.2d 626 (2d Cir. 1969). “* * * Thus, employees will be considered to be ‘handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in * * * commerce’ where they are engaged in the described activities on ‘goods’ that have moved across State lines at any time in the course of business, such…”
Brennan v. Greene's Propane Gas Serv., Inc., 479 F.2d 1027 (5th Cir. 1973). “* * * Thus, employees will be considered to be ‘handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in * * * commerce’ where they are engaged in the described activities on ‘goods’ that have moved across State lines at any time in the course of business, such…”
Glick v. State, 485 P.2d 42 (Mont. 1971). “” ’ 29 C.F.R. §779.242 .” (Emphasis added.) By its own admission, the state has recognized that “Under the ‘enterprise theory’ as stated by the United States Supreme Court in Maryland v.”
UcPech v. Chez Thuy Corp. (D. Colo. 2022). “As stated in 29 C.F.R. § 779.242 : [G]oods will be considered to “have been moved * * * in commerce” when they have moved across State lines before they are handled, sold, or otherwise worked on by the employees.”
Wirtz v. Melos Constr. Corp., 408 F.2d 626 (2d Cir. 1969). “* * * Thus, employees will be considered to be 'handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in * * * commerce' where they are engaged in the described activities on 'goods' that have moved across State lines at any time in the course of business, such…”
Lamonica v. Safe Hurricane Shutters (11th Cir. 2010). “See also 29 C.F.R. § 779.242 (stating that it is “immaterial .”
Brennan v. Freeman, 365 F. Supp. 721 (D. Minnesota 1973). “Thus, employees will be considered to be ‘handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in commerce’ where they are engaged in the described activities on ‘goods’ that have moved across State lines at any time in the course of business, such as from the…”
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.