FEDERAL · 29 U.S.C. · Chapter 20
Applicability of chapter
29 U.S.C. § 1803
This text of 29 U.S.C. § 1803 (Applicability of chapter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
29 U.S.C. § 1803.
Text
(a)The following persons are not subject to this chapter:
(1)Family business exemption.—Any individual who engages in a farm labor contracting activity on behalf of a farm, processing establishment, seed conditioning establishment, cannery, gin, packing shed, or nursery, which is owned or operated exclusively by such individual or an immediate family member of such individual, if such activities are performed only for such operation and exclusively by such individual or an immediate family member, but without regard to whether such individual has incorporated or otherwise organized for business purposes.
(2)Small business exemption.—Any person, other than a farm labor contractor, for whom the man-days exemption for agricultural labor provided under section 13(a)(6)(A) of the Fair Labor
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Malacara v. Garber
353 F.3d 393 (Fifth Circuit, 2003)
Crispin Calderon, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Jim Witvoet, Sr., Doing Business as J & B Vegetables
999 F.2d 1101 (Seventh Circuit, 1993)
Bueno v. Mattner
829 F.2d 1380 (Sixth Circuit, 1987)
Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard Management
783 F.2d 941 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
Bueno v. Mattner
633 F. Supp. 1446 (W.D. Michigan, 1986)
Aviles v. Kunkle
765 F. Supp. 358 (S.D. Texas, 1991)
Jose Flores v. Reyes Rios and Gibsonburg Canning Company
36 F.3d 507 (Sixth Circuit, 1994)
Garth Conlan v. United States Department of Labor
76 F.3d 271 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)
Elizondo v. Podgorniak
70 F. Supp. 2d 758 (E.D. Michigan, 1999)
Charles v. Burton
857 F. Supp. 1574 (M.D. Georgia, 1994)
Association of Flight Attendants-CWA v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.
372 F. Supp. 2d 91 (District of Columbia, 2005)
Soto v. McLean
20 F. Supp. 2d 901 (E.D. North Carolina, 1998)
Castillo v. Case Farms of Ohio, Inc.
48 F. Supp. 2d 670 (W.D. Texas, 1999)
Martinez v. Hauch
838 F. Supp. 1209 (W.D. Michigan, 1993)
Calderon v. Witvoet
764 F. Supp. 536 (C.D. Illinois, 1991)
Fanette v. Steven Davis Farms, LLC
28 F. Supp. 3d 1243 (N.D. Florida, 2014)
In Re Sunarhauserman, Inc.
184 B.R. 273 (N.D. Ohio, 1995)
Sejour v. Steven Davis Farms, LLC
28 F. Supp. 3d 1216 (N.D. Florida, 2014)
Opinion No. 102-77 (1977)
(Missouri Attorney General Reports, 1977)
Murillo v. Texas a & M University System
921 F. Supp. 443 (S.D. Texas, 1996)
Source Credit
History
(Pub. L. 97–470, §4, Jan. 14, 1983, 96 Stat. 2585.)
Editorial Notes
Editorial Notes
References in Text
That Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(3)(B), is act June 23, 1947, ch. 120, 61 Stat. 136, known as the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, which is classified principally to chapter 7 (§141 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 141 of this title and Tables.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date
Section effective 90 days from Jan. 14, 1983, see section 524 of Pub. L. 97–470, set out as a note under section 1801 of this title.
References in Text
That Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(3)(B), is act June 23, 1947, ch. 120, 61 Stat. 136, known as the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, which is classified principally to chapter 7 (§141 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 141 of this title and Tables.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date
Section effective 90 days from Jan. 14, 1983, see section 524 of Pub. L. 97–470, set out as a note under section 1801 of this title.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
29 U.S.C. § 1803, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/29/1803.