Board of Education v. Lee

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that district courts disagree as to whether defendants may assume certain variables, many refuse calculations based on variables not clearly suggested by the complaint or supported by evidence, and others have relied on calculations without a clear basis
• finding that the plaintiff’s claim for overtime compensation was not 26 preempted because § 514 did not alter the substance of the plaintiff’s claim and was a defense to the overtime claim that did not give rise to preemption under § 301
• finding adequate foundation for declarant’s statements when declarant stated under penalty of perjury that the statements in his declaration were based on personal knowledge he had gained in his role as an executive with defendant
• rejecting 21 the argument that “simple mathematical calculations constitute expert testimony”
• mere reference 26 to a collective bargaining agreement is not enough to find a claim substantially dependent on the 27 agreement
• “When a CBA's grievance and arbitration procedure does not directly reference the statutes at issue, courts have concluded that the agreement does not contain a “clear and unmistakable waiver” of an employee's right to a judicial forum.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).