Saenz v. AUSTIN ROOFER'S SUPPLY, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• finding supplemental jurisdiction when “there will be substantial overlap in witnesses” (emphasis added)
• breach of contract claim and FLSA claim are not “separate and independent” under § 1441(c
• state law tort claims were separate and independent from FLSA claims because there was no common basis in fact between the claims other than the workplace and the employment relationship
• “[T]he employment relationship alone is insufficient to bring state law claims within the same nucleus of operative facts as a FLSA claim acting as the jurisdictional ‘hook.’”
• for federal courts “to decide state claims that lack an independent basis of jurisdiction, [they] must find that the state and federal claims ‘derive from a common nucleus of operative facts . . . .’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).