Danielle Viktor, Ltd. v. Department of Labor & Industry

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that limousine drivers were at risk of profit or loss even though they had not invested capital in the limousine business
• holding that limousine drivers were at risk of profit or loss even though they had not invested capital in the limousine business
• holding that because drivers provided services to company on job-by-job basis and each assignment was taken or rejected strictly at drivers’ prerogative, drivers were independent contractors “[gjiven the fluidity of these arrangements”
• holding that whether workers are able to work for competitors is relevant
• stating that the limousine drivers could “obtain clients,” hand out “business cards,” and “advertise their services using their own letterhead”
• stating that the limousine drivers could “obtain clients,” hand out “business cards,” and PAM - 8 “advertise their services using their own letterhead”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).