No. 20-1093

Just Energy Marketing Corp., et al. v. Davina Hurt, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, et al.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-02-11
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (1) Experienced Counsel
Tags: christopher-v-smithkline-beecham circuit-split employment-law fair-labor-standards-act outside-salesman regulatory-approval sales sales-exemption
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA WageAndHour JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-06-03
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Petitioners' door-to-door solicitors are exempt 'outside salesmen' under the FLSA

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exempts from its minimum wage and overtime requirements any employee who is employed “in the capacity of outside salesman.” FLSA regulations define “outside salesman” as an employee “whose primary duty is making sales,” and the FLSA itself defines “sale” broadly to “include[] any sale, exchange, contract to sell, consignment for sale, shipment for sale, or other disposition.” Petitioners employed Respondents to go door to door and persuade customers to buy natural gas and electricity. When customers agreed, they signed agreements, which were subject to certain regulatory checks and Petitioners’ ultimate approval before the sales were consummated. In a divided decision, the Sixth Circuit held that Respondents are not exempt outside salespeople under the FLSA because their sales agreements were subject to those subsequent steps. That decision contradicts this Court’s decision in Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142 (2012), and directly conflicts with a Second Circuit decision holding that, consistent with Christopher, Petitioners’ door-to-door solicitors are exempt outside salespeople. The decision below thus creates a wholly untenable circuit split within Petitioners’ own workforce. The question presented is: Whether, as the Second Circuit held, Petitioners’ door-to-door solicitors are exempt “outside salesmen” under the FLSA or, as the Sixth Circuit held, Petitioners’ door-to-door solicitors are not exempt “outside salesmen” under the FLSA because the sales agreements remain subject to regulatory checks and Petitioners’ ultimate approval.

Docket Entries

2021-06-07
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/3/2021.
2021-05-17
Reply of petitioners Just Energy Marketing Corp., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2021-04-28
Brief of respondents Davina Hurt, et al. in opposition filed.
2021-03-31
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including April 28, 2021.
2021-03-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 14, 2021 to April 28, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-03-27
Letter of March 27, 2021 from counsel for petitioners filed.
2021-03-15
Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, National Federation of Independent Business, and the Direct Selling Association filed.
2021-02-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 14, 2021.
2021-02-23
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 15, 2021 to April 14, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-02-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 15, 2021)

Attorneys

Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, National Federation of Independent Business, and the Direct Selling Association
Michael Hugh McGinleyDechert LLP, Amicus
Michael Hugh McGinleyDechert LLP, Amicus
Davina Hurt, et al.
Neal Kumar KatyalHogan Lovells US LLP, Respondent
Neal Kumar KatyalHogan Lovells US LLP, Respondent
Just Energy Marketing Corp., et al.
Paul D. ClementKirkland & Ellis LLP, Petitioner
Paul D. ClementKirkland & Ellis LLP, Petitioner