Chenault v. Bank of Arlington

How courts have described this case

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

• “Because the IMWL parallels the FLSA so closely, courts have generally interpreted their provisions to be coextensive, and so have generally applied the same analysis to both.”
• “Because the IMWL parallels the FLSA so closely, courts have generally interpreted their provisions to be coextensive, and so have generally applied the same analysis to both.”
• “Because the IMWL parallels the FLSA so closely, courts have generally interpreted their provisions to be coextensive, and so have generally applied the same analysis to both.” (citations omitted)
• “Because the [Illinois Minimum Wage law (“IMWL”), 820 ILCS 105/1 et seq.] parallels the FLSA so closely, courts have generally interpreted their provisions to be coextensive, and so have generally applied the same analysis to both.”
• \[The expert] 'cleaned' the data set before using it....\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).