Thursday, September 4th, 2008...1:51 pm
AWHA Burden of Proof for Exemptions: Preponderance, or Beyond a Reasonable Doubt?
Did the 2005 amendments to Alaska’s Wage and Hour Act, adopting the federal regulation definitions for the white collar exemptions, also adopt the federal burden of proof concerning exemptions? What is the prevailing federal standard - preponderance or “clear and convincing”? Was the discussion in Fred Meyer of Alaska, Inc. v. Bailey, 100 P.3d 881, 884 (Alaska 2004), concerning proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” dicta; if not dicta, did the holding survive the 2005 amendments? These are the issues before U. S. District Judge Timothy Burgess in Borge v. Getronics, 3:07-cv-00105(TMB).
Here’s the briefing.
Employees’ Brief in Opposition
Timothy Seaver (Seaver & Wagner) and Anthony Lebo represent the 11 plaintiffs. Gregory Fisher and Jennifer Alexander of Birch Horton’s Anchorage office represent the defendant employers.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.