Skip to main content

PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE

E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera

Issues

Are employers seeking to invoke an FLSA exemption required to meet the preponderance of the evidence standard or a clear and convincing evidence standard?

This case asks for the Supreme Court to decide which standard of proof applies when an employer asserts an FLSA exemption as an affirmative defense from liability: preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence. Petitioners, E.M.D. Sales, Inc., et al. (“E.M.D.”), argue that the clear and convincing evidence standard applies only in limited circumstances, not to mere monetary disputes between private parties. Further, E.M.D. asserts that the risk of erroneous decision is equal between the parties. Respondents Faustino Sanchez Carrera et al. (“Carrera”), argue that a clear and convincing evidence standard applies because the FLSA protects important interests. Further, Carrera argues the clear and convincing evidence standard is necessary to allocate the unequal risks among employers and employees. The outcome of this case has serious implications for labor law.

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

Whether the burden of proof that employers must satisfy to demonstrate the applicability of a Fair Labor Standards Act exemption is a mere preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence.

Congress enacted the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) in 1938 to protect employees from unfair labor practices. Brief for Petitioners, E.M.D. Sales, Inc. et al. at 4–5.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Professor Stewart Schwab for his guidance and insights into this case.

Additional Resources

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE