Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Pabst v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. Case Brief

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit2000Docket #228479
228 F.3d 1128 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 5510 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 23502 2000 WL 1352913

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: Technicians required to monitor alarms from home with frequent interruptions were entitled to compensation for all on-call time. The court found the severe restrictions on personal life meant the time was spent predominantly for the employer’s benefit under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Legal Significance: Reinforces that the frequency of interruptions is a critical factor in determining if on-call time is compensable under the FLSA. It clarifies that an employer’s knowledge is established by creating the on-call system, regardless of whether employees report the time as overtime.

Pabst v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Plaintiffs, three Electronic Technicians for Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. (OG&E), were responsible for monitoring automated building alarms during all non-working hours. This included weekdays from 4:30 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. and twenty-four hours a day on weekends. Alarms were transmitted to home computers and alpha-numeric pagers, which were only 70% reliable. The technicians were required to respond to any alarm within fifteen minutes or face discipline. The district court found that plaintiffs received an average of three to five alarms per night, each requiring approximately forty-five minutes to resolve, often remotely. These frequent interruptions severely disrupted their sleep and prevented them from engaging in most personal activities, as they had to remain near their computers. OG&E’s policy was to compensate employees only for the time spent actively responding to an alarm, not for the entire on-call period. Plaintiffs sued, claiming all their on-call time constituted compensable work under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The district court found for the plaintiffs, and OG&E appealed.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Is an employee’s on-call time compensable work under the Fair Labor Standards Act when the frequency of calls and the short required response time effectively prevent the employee from using the time for personal pursuits?

Yes. The court affirmed the holding that the on-call time was compensable Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate veli

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Is an employee’s on-call time compensable work under the Fair Labor Standards Act when the frequency of calls and the short required response time effectively prevent the employee from using the time for personal pursuits?

Conclusion

This case solidifies the principle that the frequency of interruptions is a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irur

Legal Rule

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), on-call time is compensable work Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor

Legal Analysis

The court first rejected OG&E's argument that it lacked the requisite knowledge Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labo

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • On-call time is compensable under the FLSA if frequent calls (3-5
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidata

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

It is better to risk saving a guilty man than to condemn an innocent one.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+