About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (2017)

handle is hein.ali/relagcy0128 and id is 1 raw text is: AGENCY CHAPTER 3. CREATION AND INTERPRETATION OF AUTHORITY AND APPARENT AUTHORITY TOPIC 1. METHODS OF MANIFESTING CONSENT § 27. Creation of Apparent Authority; General Rule Or.2017. Quot. in case quot. in diss. op. Union brought an action under Oregon's Public Employee Collective Bargaining Act against city, alleging that city committed an unfair labor practice when a city council member wrote a letter to a local newspaper in which she disparaged labor unions and called for city employees to decertify their union. After the Employment Relations Board found city liable, the court of appeals reversed. This court reversed and remanded for further proceedings, holding that council member could have acted as city's designated representative, depending on whether city employees would have reasonably believed that she acted on behalf of city. The dissent argued that unfair labor practices could not be committed by a person merely because an employee reasonably believed that the person spoke on behalf of the employer, unless the employer designated the person to speak on its behalf or took other action to clothe the person with apparent authority under Restatement of Agency § 27. American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees v. City of Lebanon, 388 P.3d 1028, 1048. CHAPTER 7. LIABILITY OF PRINCIPAL TO THIRD PERSON; TORTS TOPIC 2. LIABILITY FOR AUTHORIZED CONDUCT OR CONDUCT INCIDENTAL THERETO TITLE B. TORTS OF SERVANTS WHO IS A SERVANT § 220. Definition C.A.4, 2017. Subsec. (1) cit. in case quot. but dist. Former employees of now-defunct subcontractor filed a collective action against subcontractor's owners and general contractor for which subcontractor (and thus plaintiffs) worked almost exclusively, alleging that defendants willfully failed to pay overtime and other wages to plaintiffs in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Maryland Wage and Hour Law. The district court granted summary judgment for general contractor on the ground that it was not plaintiffs' employer. Reversing and remanding, this court held that defendants jointly employed plaintiffs. The court adopted a new test for determining whether entities constituted joint employers, noting that existing tests improperly relied on common-law agency principles set forth in Restatement of A L Im For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most