29 U.S.C. § 3

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar

For the purposes of this Act:“(1) The term ‘Administrator’ means the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs.“(2) The term ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of Labor.“(3) The terms ‘veteran’, ‘Korean conflict’, ‘compensation’, ‘service-connected’, ‘State’, ‘active military, naval, or air service’, and ‘Vietnam era’, have the meanings given such terms in paragraphs (2), (9), (13), (16), (20), (24), and (29), respectively, of section 101 of title 38, United States Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1935–2024 · leading case: Patterson v. Raymours Furniture Co., 96 F. Supp. 3d 71 (S.D.N.Y. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Patterson v. Raymours Furniture Co., 96 F. Supp. 3d 71 (S.D.N.Y. 2015). “DISCUSSION In deciding a motion to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 3 and 4, the Court “applies a standard similar to that applicable for a motion for summary judgment.”

Robert Reich, Sec'y of Labor, United States Dep't of Labor v. Conagra, Inc., Doing Bus. as Nw. Fabrics & Crafts, 987 F.2d 1357 (8th Cir. 1993). “” 29 U.S.C. § 3 (e)(1). As the Supreme Court noted in an ERISA case, this definition is "completely circular and explains nothing.”

Specht v. City of Sioux Falls, 639 F.3d 814 (8th Cir. 2011). “227 (b) (“Section 7(p)(l) applies to such outside employment provided ... (2) the two employers are in fact separate and independent.”

Johnson v. Long John Silver's Restaurants, Inc., 320 F. Supp. 2d 656 (M.D. Tenn. 2004). “29 U.S.C. § 3 . Plaintiff’s argument must fail, however, because the agreement need not be signed.”

McFadden v. R&R Engine & Mach. Co., 102 F. Supp. 2d 458 (N.D. Ohio 2000). “” Trial brief at 3 (citing 29 U.S.C. § 3 (21)(A)(iii)). Then, during argument at trial, R&R backed away from this concession and again argued it was not a plan fiduciary.”

Stout v. Pratt, 12 F. Supp. 864 (W.D. Mo. 1935). “The act creates the National Labor Relations Board (section 3 [ 29 U.S.C.A. § 3 ]) as an instrumentality to effect the prime object of the act.”

Walsh v. Care at Home, LLC (D. Conn. 2021). “Under 29 U.S.C. §3 (m), the “‘[w]age’ paid to any employee includes the reasonable cost, as determined by the Administrator [of the Wage and Hour Division], to the employer of furnishing such employee with board, lodging, or other facilities, if such board, lodging, or other…”

Strzalkowski v. Mary Ann Twp. (S.D. Ohio 2023). “The adoption of 29 U.S.C. § 3 (y) in 1999 supports the conclusion that the firefighter exemption must be understood expansively.”

James Kilkenny, as Trs. of the Constr. Council Local Union 175 Pension Fund v. Flushing Asphalt, LLC (E.D.N.Y 2024). “Asphalt is an employer under ERISA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 3 (5) and 29 U.S.C. 1002(5). See Compl.”

Hoffman v. Parksite Grp., 596 F. Supp. 2d 416 (D. Conn. 2009). “29 U.S.C. § 3 57 states in full: “Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective…”

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.