October Term 2010 · Docket 09-834
Does an oral complaint trigger anti-retaliation protections?
The dispute centers on whether the Fair Labor Standards Act protects employees who report violations verbally rather than in writing.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
The employee's advocate argued oral reports deserve protection. He emphasized the practical reality of workplace reporting.
The employer's advocate argued the law requires formal procedures. He stressed the need for clear documentation.
The government advocate noted many statutes share similar provisions. He highlighted the broader legal landscape.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-39 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-3
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the scope of the Fair Labor Standards Act. It asks if the statute covers informal verbal reports. The lower court ruled against the employee. The employee seeks reversal of that judgment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 13, 2010.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
The employee wants the court to reverse the lower court judgment. He seeks protection for his oral report.
The employer wants the court to affirm the lower court judgment. It seeks to limit protection to written filings.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
What each side says
The employee argues oral reports constitute protected activity. He claims the statute does not require writing.
The employer argues the statute requires formal filings. It claims oral statements lack legal weight.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if a casual remark to a government employee counts as a complaint.
Justice Alito asked what filing a complaint specifically means in this context.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-39 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-3
Why it matters
This case defines the threshold for employee protection. It determines whether informal reports trigger legal safeguards. The outcome shapes workplace reporting standards nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-39 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-3
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 33-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 33-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-9
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.