E.m.d. Sales v. Carrera (604 U.S. 45)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 15, 2025 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 604 U.S. 45 · 145 S. Ct. 34
- Decided
- January 15, 2025
- Term
- October Term 2024
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Kavanaugh
- Issue area
- Unions
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2024 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321 , 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus E.M.D. SALES, INC., ET AL. v. CARRERA ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23–217. Argued November 5, 2024—Decided January 15, 2025 In 1938, Congress enacted the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), guar- anteeing a federal minimum wage for covered workers, 29 U. S. C. §206 (a)(1), and requiring overtime pay for those working more than 40 hours per week, §207(a)(1). Congress exempted many types of employ- ees from the FLSA’s overtime-pay requirement, including outside salesmen who primarily work away from their employer’s place of busi- ness. §213(a)(1). The law places the burden on the employer to show that an exemption applies. Petitioner EMD distributes food products in the Washington, D. C., area and employs sales representatives who manage inventory and take orders at grocery stores. Several sales representatives sued EMD alleging that the company violated the FLSA by failing to…
Excerpt of a 21,018-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.