Harris v. Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the contractor plaintiff was an employee of the defendant where the defendant “actually controlled the substantive aspects of the [plaintiff’s] tasks”
• holding that the Title VII “employee” requirement was nonjurisdictional
• recognizing Mason’s abrogation and declining to grant summary judgment because of material fact issues
• “During the pendency of the contract, [the plaintiff] was to work as directed by [Voice of America’s] ‘Contracting Officers Representative’ [ ] for ‘[Voice of America] Radio, Television and/or internet entities[.]’” (third alteration in original)
• “[T]he question of plaintiffs ‘employee’ status in this case is so closely analogous to the question in Arbaugh that plaintiffs status must be considered a merits issue, rather than a jurisdictional matter.” (citation omitted)
• “[The plaintiff] expressly agreed that there was no ‘employer/employee relationship.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).