In determining whether a hired party is an employee under the general common law of agency, we consider the hiring party's right to control the manner and means by which the product is accomplished. Among the other factors relevant to this inquiry are:
Cmty. for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730, 751-752 (1989)
At common law the relevant factors defining the master-servant relationship focus on the master's control over the servant.
Clackamas Gastroenterology Assocs., P.C. v. Wells, 538 U.S. 440, 448 (2003)
THIS RESEARCH GUIDE/PATHFINDER DOES NOT REPRESENT ANY LEGAL ADVICE FOR ANY REASON AND DOES NOT ESTABLISH ANY ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
PLEASE CONTACT AN ATTORNEY FOR ANY LEGAL ADVICE.
THANK YOU.
Under general common law, in determining whether a hired party is an employee or an independent contractor, a court considers "the hiring party's right to control the manner and means by which the product is accomplished."
Green v. United States, 700 F. Supp. 2d 1280, 1299 (M.D. Fla. 2010)
In appropriate cases, factors relating to an individual's economic dependence upon the hiring party may be taken into account.
Bell v. Atl. Trucking Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114342, 16 (M.D. Fla. 2009)
In order to prove a violation of the FLSA, an employee bears the initial burden of proving that he performed work for which he was not properly compensated. An employee has carried out his burden if he proves that he has in fact performed work for which he was improperly compensated and if he produces sufficient evidence to show the amount and extent of that work as a matter of just and reasonable inference. The burden then shifts to the employer to come forward with evidence of the precise amount of work performed or with evidence to negative the reasonableness of the inference to be drawn from the employee's evidence. If the employer fails to produce such evidence, the court may then award damages to the employee, even though the result be only approximate.
Leach v. Johnston, 812 F. Supp. 1198, 1212-1213 (M.D. Fla. 1992)
In determining whether a hired party is an employee under the general common law of agency, the court considers the hiring party's right to control the manner and means by which the product is accomplished. Among the other factors relevant to this inquiry are the skill required; the source of the instrumentalities and tools; the location of the work; the duration of the relationship between the parties; whether the hiring party has the right to assign additional projects to the hired party; the extent of the hired party's discretion over when and how long to work; the method of payment; the hired party's role in hiring and paying assistants; whether the work is part of the regular business of the hiring party; whether the hiring party is in business; the provision of employee benefits; and the tax treatment of the hired party.
Lundstedt v. City of Miami, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21884, 1 (S.D. Fla. 1995)
