Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Zambrano v. Reinert

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
291 F.3d 964 (7th Cir. 2002)


Facts

From June to October 1999, Rene Zambrano (plaintiff) worked as a seasonal worker for Seneca Foods, Inc. (Seneca), a vegetable processor in Wisconsin. In April 2000, Zambrano filed a claim for unemployment-compensation benefits. Because Zambrano was a seasonal worker, the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD) applied the Cannery Rule to determine whether Zambrano was eligible. The Cannery Rule provided that a seasonal fruit or vegetable processor was not eligible for unemployment-insurance benefits unless: (1) the individual was employed outside of the active processing season, (2) the individual was otherwise eligible for benefits under Wisconsin Statute section 108.04(4)(a), or (3) the individual earned over $200 at another job during a statutorily defined time period preceding the processing job. The DWD determined that Zambrano did not work outside the active processing season, that Zambrano was not otherwise eligible for benefits under section 108.04(4)(a), and that Zambrano did not earn over $200 from an employer other than Seneca during the relevant period. DWD therefore denied Zambrano’s claim for unemployment-compensation benefits. Zambrano sued DWD Secretary Jennifer Reinert (defendant), claiming that the Cannery Rule violated the When Due Clause of the Social Security Act (SSA), 42 U.S.C. § 503(a)(1); the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(10); and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Reinert. Zambrano appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Kanne, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.