United States v. Nevada

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the State, not just its agency, was an employer because the State pro- cessed the paychecks and funded the salary for the agency’s employee
• both citing Paxton v. City of Montebello, 712 F. Supp. 2d 1017, 1021 (C.D. Cal. 2010
• “An intent 16 to violate the statute is not necessary; but it is also not sufficient that the employer simply knew 17 of its potential applicability.”
• assessing which entity possessed the authority to hire employees

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).