Gardner v. Daugherty

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court did not err in dismissing individual capacity claims because a sheriff “in his individual capacity had no control over [the plaintiff’s] employment and di[d] not qualify as [the plaintiff’s] employer under the [Equal Pay] Act”
• stating that whether a defendant is an “employer” pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 203(d) is a question of law
• explaining that complaint itself, rather than caption to complaint, controls identification of parties and capacity in which they are sued
• “sheriffs deputy is legally an extension of the sheriff and is likewise immune from suit”
• “[W]here a plaintiff brings an action against a public official in his official capacity, the suit is against the office that official represents, and not the official himself.”
• “After a district court grants an opportunity to amend and identifies the pleading’s deficiencies . . . dismissal with prejudice is appropriate”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).