Air Couriers International v. Employment Development Department

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, where many drivers had worked for “years,” these “lengthy tenures” were “inconsistent with independent contractor status”
• noting that “the drivers were not engaged in a separate profession or operating an independent business”
• explaining that “the fact that a certain amount of freedom is allowed or is inherent in the nature of the work involved” does not preclude a finding of employment status
• upholding trial court’s finding that there was “no inconsistency between employee status and the driver’s discretion on when to take breaks or vacation”
• affirming trial court’s finding that delivery drivers were employees as a matter of law
• that an employer has the right to control is not barred by a showing that workers have latitude in how the work is performed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).