Newman v. Advanced Technology Innovation Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a purported per diem payment was part of a regular rate where the payment was based on the number of hours worked
• explaining that “the regular . . . rate . . . is a fact question” (citing Aaron, 334 U.S. at 461)
• concluding an employee’s regular rate of pay “is a fact question”
• noting the FOH “contains further guidance, which we treat as persuasive authority”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).