Christensen v. Harris County
2000 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Christensen v. Harris County?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Christensen v. Harris County, 529 U.S. 576 (2000), is a Supreme Court of the United States case holding that a county's policy of requiring employees to schedule time off to avoid accruing time off was not prohibited by the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Quick Facts Christensen v. Harris County, Argued February 23, 2000 Decided May 1, 2000 ...
Christensen v. Harris County | |
---|---|
Argued February 23, 2000 Decided May 1, 2000 | |
Full case name | Edward Christensen, et al. v. Harris County, et al. |
Citations | 529 U.S. 576 (more) 120 S. Ct. 1655; 146 L. Ed. 2d 621 |
Case history | |
Prior | 158 F.3d 241 (5th Cir. 1998) (affirmed) |
Holding | |
An opinion letter from the Department of Labor, stating that an employer had to get the employee to agree before the employee had to schedule time off, did not receive Chevron deference and instead should receive the less deferential standard of Skidmore v. Swift. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Thomas, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter; Scalia (except for Part III) |
Concurrence | Souter |
Concurrence | Scalia (except for Part III) |
Dissent | Stevens, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer |
Dissent | Breyer, joined by Ginsburg |
Laws applied | |
Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.S. § 201 et seq. |
Close