Encino Motorcars v. Navarro II

• Issue: Employment
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court
• Term: October 2017
• Oral Argument: January 2017
• Vote: 5-4
• Opinion: Justice Thomas
• Lower Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Question Presented: 

Whether service advisors at car dealerships are exempt under 29 U.S.C. §213(b)(10)(A) from the FLSA's overtime-pay requirements.

RLC's Position:

The Retail Litigation Center joined the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in this case which asks the court to decide whether “service advisors” at car dealerships are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The joint brief goes beyond the narrow question presented and instead asks the Court to reject the canon of statutory interpretation that is used by some lower courts to view the FLSA as a remedial statute that must be construed broadly while its exemptions are viewed narrowly. 

Case Outcome:

Service advisors are salesmen primarily engaged in servicing automobiles and as such are exempt from the FLSA’s over-time pay requirement. The Court rejects the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation that the exemptions for the FLSA should be construed narrowly. The case is reversed and remanded. 

Procedural History and Case Documents:

• Encino Motorcars' Petition for Certiorari, May 2017
• Navarro's Brief in Opposition, July 2017
• Encino Motorcars' Reply Brief, August 2017
• Petition Granted, September 2017
• Encino Motorcars' Opening Brief, November 2017
• RLC's Brief on the Merits, November 2017
• Court's Opinion, April 2018

Please use the DOWNLOAD button below to access the RLC's Brief.