Friends of Animals v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that directors of an insurance brokerage firm were employees for purposes of the ADEA because each performed traditional employee duties, worked full-time for the firm, and reported to senior members of the firm
• noting that the RFOA provision created a “broad” exception to employer liability under the ADEA but not addressing the burden of proof on the defense
• finding that a director did perform traditional employee duties when he was chosen from people in senior management positions, oversaw the firm’s legal affairs, and was responsible for keeping corporate records
• relying on cases defining “employee” for purposes of 438 FICHMAN v. MEDIA CENTER the ADEA and Title VII in evaluating age discrimination claim
• stating that where the EEOC has the authority to enforce the ADEA, “that authority cannot be altered by a waiver of the rights of a private party — even a private party with a direct interest in the subject of concern to the EEOC”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).