Case Briefing Vizcaino V. Us Dist. Court for Wd of Wash., 173 F. 3d 713 (9th Cir.1999)

1693 Words7 Pages
Case Briefing #2 Vizcaino v. US Dist. Court for WD of Wash., 173 F. 3d 713 (9th Cir.1999) Material Facts: Donna Vizcaino, Jon R. Waite, Mark Stout, Geoffrey Culbert, Lesley Stuart, Thomas Morgan, Elizabeth Spokoiny, and Larry Spokoiny sued on behalf of themselves and a court certified class against Microsoft Corporation and its various pension and welfare plans, including its Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP), and sought a determination that they were entitled even as independent contractors to participate in the plan benefits because those benefits were available to Microsoft 's common law employees. Procedural History: The Plaintiffs filed action against Microsoft Corp. for inclusion in Microsoft’s employee…show more content…
From the employer/employee social prospective, this case almost certainly, negatively impacts the relationship between the two. Neither party can conclude what is mandatory or up for bargain when contracting with one another. These imposed contracts have the unnecessary consequence of forcing employers to retroactively extend to workers optional benefits for which they did not contract. Rules: Common law employee In the case of Nationwide Mutual INS. Co. v. Darden, 503 U.S. 318, 323-4, 112 S. Ct. 1344, 117 I. Ed. 2d 581 (1992). The court singled out five factors as determinative: recruitment, training, duration, right to assign additional work, and control over the relationship between the worker and agency. In Kelly v. Southern Pac. Co., 419 U.S. 318, 324, 95 S. Ct. 472, 42 I. Ed. 2d 498 (1974) “A person may be the servant of two masters, not joint employers, at one time as to one act, if the service to one does not involve abandonment of the service to the other.” The incorporation of S 423 of the Internal Revenue Code, see 26 U.S.C. S 423 (1994), requires that qualifying stock purchase plans permit all common law employees to participate. Mandamus Jurisdiction The All Writs Act provides that "[t]he Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law." 28

    More about Case Briefing Vizcaino V. Us Dist. Court for Wd of Wash., 173 F. 3d 713 (9th Cir.1999)

      Get Access