Daniels v. BD. OF TR. OF HERINGTON MUN. HOSP.

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting argument that indemnification violates public policy because, unlike Martin, the employer sought indemnification from a county, not its employees
• rejecting argument against contractual indemnification following settlement because there was no finding of a FLSA violation and the defendant admitted no FLSA liability
• “[T]he requirements of § 12-105b are conditions precedent and thus must be pleaded in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(c).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).