29 C.F.R. §780.158 - Examples of other practices within section 3(f) if requirements are met
| Cite as | 29 C.F.R. §780.158 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
10 cases
-
Jimenez v. Duran, C 01-3068-MWB.
...v. Hazlehurst Mercantile Co., 153 F.2d 153 [(5th Cir.1946)]; Jordan v. Stark Bros. Nurseries, 45 F.Supp. 769 [(W.D.Ark.1942)]). 29 C.F.R. § 780.158(b) & (c) (emphasis iv. Is the necessary connection present here? First, the court is simply not convinced that either Holly Farms or pertinent ......
-
Tijerina-Salazar v. Venegas
...indubitably would fall within the “secondary farming” definition of “agricultural.” (Docs. 152-8 at 21:7-11; 152-9 at 45:1-5); See 29 C.F.R. § 780.158. Mechanic work on vehicles, on the other hand, separate from any purpose for which the vehicles would be utilized, certainly would not const......
-
Martinez v. Deaf Smith County Grain Processors, Inc., Civ. A. No. CA-2-81-228.
...The maximum number of man-days used by the Defendants in any calendar quarter of 1980 was 426. Even assuming, as Plaintiff argues, that 29 CFR § 780.158(a) (1981) requires the bookkeepers employed by Skiles at Livestock Health Products, Inc., to be included in this total, the result is not ......
-
Bills v. Cactus Family Farms, LLC
..."the culling, catching, cooping, and loading of poultry" may qualify as agriculture under the secondary meaning of Section 203(f). 29 C.F.R. § 780.158(b).Plaintiff's work was necessarily performed incidental to and in conjunction with farming operations. At one point it would have been norm......
Request a trial to view additional results