# John Orton v. Johnny's Lunch Franchise, LLC

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · February 21, 2012 · 668 F.3d 843

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9843100

## Case

- **Full name:** John ORTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHNNY'S LUNCH FRANCHISE, LLC; Anthony J. Calamunci, Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 21, 2012
- **Citations:** 668 F.3d 843; 18 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1316; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3344; 2012 WL 539373
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Merritt
- **Judges:** Merritt, Moore, Mays
- **Cited by:** 295 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9843100

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that “the district court in its discretion may properly choose whether to exercise § 1367(a) jurisdiction over the supplemental state-law claims; however, such a decision is ‘purely discretionary’” (quoting Carlsbad Tech., Inc. v. HIF Bio, Inc., 556 U.S. 635 , 639–40 (…
- explaining that the court’s decision to exercise supplemental jurisdiction is “purely discretionary”

## Opinion text

MERRITT, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I agree with the court that the “exemption” issue should be decided after the defendant describes the issue in an affirmative defense and after further proceedings. That was not done here. The district court decided the case only on a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). We do not know what the facts are. It may be that the parties entered into a new agreement based on the company’s cash *851 position. We do not know. I would not speculate on how the exempt status statutory language and regulations should be interpreted for various fact patterns. Nor would I indicate a view of what the result would be if the company ran out of cash and so informed its executive employees who decided to stay on the job to see if the company could get over its problems.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9843100. Public record. Not legal advice.