Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP.

Docket No.: 11-204
Certiorari Granted: 11/28/11
Argued: April 16, 2012
Decided: 06/18/12

Topics:

FLSA, Fair Labor Standards Act, Labor Department, Natural Resources, maximum hours

PartyNames: Michael Shane Christopher, et al. v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, dba GlaxoSmithKline
Petitioner: Michael Shane Christopher, et al.
Respondent: SmithKline Beecham Corporation, dba GlaxoSmithKline

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: 635 F.3d 383
Supreme Court Docket

Michael Shane Christopher, et al.
v.
SmithKline Beecham Corporation, dba GlaxoSmithKline
Background:

The outside sales exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act exempts from the overtime requirements of the Act "any employee employed ... in the capacity of outside salesman (as such terms are defined and delimited from time to time by regulations of the Secretary ...)." 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(1). The Secretary of Labor has implemented various regulations that "define and delimit" the outside sales exemption and, filing as amici in this and other related matters, has interpreted these regulations to find the exemption inapplicable to pharmaceutical sales representatives. A split exists between the Second and Ninth Circuits concerning whether this interpretation is owed deference and whether the outside sales exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Question Presented:

(1) Whether deference is owed to the Secretary's interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act's outside sales exemption and related regulations; and (2) Whether the Fair Labor Standards Act's outside sales exemption applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Note:

The outside sales exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act exempts from the overtime requirements of the Act "any employee employed ... in the capacity of outside salesman (as such terms are defined and delimited from time to time by regulations of the Secretary ...)." 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(1). The Secretary of Labor has implemented various regulations that "define and delimit" the outside sales exemption and, filing as amici in this and other related matters, has interpreted these regulations to find the exemption inapplicable to pharmaceutical sales representatives. A split exists between the Second and Ninth Circuits concerning whether this interpretation is owed deference and whether the outside sales exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.

CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP.
ORAL ARGUMENT

04/16/12

Listen to Oral Argument in CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP.
Holding: AFFIRMED
Opinion By:

Warning: Use of undefined constant caseTitle - assumed 'caseTitle' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/supremec/public_html/supremecourtobserver.com/code/sofunctionsndb.php on line 1147

CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP.
Case Documents

1CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP. Oral Argument Transcript (PDF)
2CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP. Oral Argument Audio
3Opinion in CHRISTOPHER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP.
4BRIEF FOR THE PETITIONERS
5REPLY BRIEF
6BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT
Additional documents for this case are pending review.