Harrell v. Diamond a Entertainment, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that exotic dancer did not satisfy creative professional exemption under similar circumstances
• finding that club exercised “considerable control over its dancers” when club, among other conditions, required its dancers to abide by written rules and regulations
• finding that dancer’s “freedom to work when she wants and for whomever she wants” did not “reflect[ ] economic independence,” and that these freedoms, in context, “merely mask[ed] the economic reality of dependence.”
• stating “[t]hat a dancer may increase her earnings by increased ‘hustling’ matters little” for determining opportunity for loss and/or profit
• finding a dancer who spent a $1,000 on costumes, $130 a month for hairstyling, $100 a month for make-up, and $65 a month for shoes had only a minor investment compared to the club’s operators
• finding a dancer who spent a $1,000 on costumes, $130 a month for 18 hairstyling, $100 a month for make-up, and $65 a month for shoes had only a minor 19 investment compared to the club’s operators

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).