Carstens v. Mayers, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that assistance given as a “favor or an accommodation” does not amount to interdependence of employees’ activities
• holding that assistance given as a “favor or an accommodation” does not mean that the employees are engaged in a common activity
• holding that a “favor or an accommodation” between two groups of employees does not affect the common-activity analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• LeDoux v. M.A. Mortenson Co.
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2013-07-22· cited 7×
• Kelly ex rel. Washburn v. Kraemer Construction, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2017-06-07· cited 5×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Betlach v. Wayzata Condominium
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1979-04-06· cited 420×
• O'MALLEY v. Ulland Bros.
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1996-06-06· cited 96×
• McCourtie v. United States Steel Corp.
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1958-11-21· cited 65×
• Schleicher v. Lunda Construction Co.
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1987-05-22· cited 18×
• Higgins v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1987-02-03· cited 8×
• Sorenson v. Visser
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1997-02-11· cited 8×