{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:868-f-3d-461",
    "cite_as": "NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:868-f-3d-461)",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-10-11",
    "fingerprint": "ewai:us:e0b409",
    "proof": "sha256:4d99b0d35f58d610ecd6dab23a80b50a9d73190c38c44b68a58617d3d0178b95",
    "jurisdiction": "us",
    "lang": "en",
    "publisher": "NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal",
    "terms": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"
  },
  "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot",
  "item": {
    "schema_version": "1.0.0",
    "id": "us:868-f-3d-461",
    "jurisdiction": "us",
    "lang": "en",
    "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot",
    "brand": {
      "product": "NovaCopilot",
      "platform": "ExploreWorldAI",
      "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal",
      "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
      "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB",
      "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot",
      "source": "Source: NovaCopilot",
      "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot",
      "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"
    },
    "sections": [
      {
        "title": "RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b)",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "File Name: 17a0188p.06",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "DEBI MCKINNEY, on behalf of herself and all others",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_7",
          "para_8",
          "para_9"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "CARLTON MANOR NURSING & REHABILITATION",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_11",
          "para_12",
          "para_13",
          "para_14",
          "para_15",
          "para_16",
          "para_17",
          "para_18",
          "para_19",
          "para_20",
          "para_21",
          "para_22",
          "para_23",
          "para_24",
          "para_25",
          "para_26",
          "para_27",
          "para_28",
          "para_29"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "No. 16-3895",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "Appeal from the United States District Court",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_32",
          "para_33"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Argued: August 2, 2017",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "Decided and Filed: August 18, 2017",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_36",
          "para_37"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "COUNSEL",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "ARGUED: Samuel Heldman, THE GARDNER FIRM, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. ON",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_40",
          "para_41",
          "para_42",
          "para_43"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 2",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_45"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "OPINION",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_47"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "SUTTON, Circuit Judge. After the Ohio Department of Health cited Carlton Manor",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_49"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Management Company to help turn things around. When that did not work, the nursing home",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_51"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Sovran owes the nursing home’s employees back pay under the Worker Adjustment and",
        "paragraphs": []
      },
      {
        "title": "Retraining Notification Act, which requires “employer[s]” to give their employees 60 days’",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_54",
          "para_55",
          "para_56",
          "para_57",
          "para_58",
          "para_59",
          "para_60",
          "para_61",
          "para_62",
          "para_63"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "By January 2014, the nursing home had resolved 26 of the deficiencies. Yet the 27th, the",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_65",
          "para_66",
          "para_67",
          "para_68",
          "para_69",
          "para_70"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, called WARN by those who like acronyms. The",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_72"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 3",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_74",
          "para_75",
          "para_76",
          "para_77",
          "para_78",
          "para_79",
          "para_80",
          "para_81"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "This case begins and largely ends with the words of the Act. Section 2102 says: “An",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_83",
          "para_84"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "2104 adds: “Any employer who orders a plant closing or mass layoff in violation of section",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_86",
          "para_87"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Only “employer[s]” that “order” a plant closing face regulation by the Act or liability",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_89",
          "para_90",
          "para_91"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "And the entity from whom the employees will most acutely appreciate any warning about a",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_93",
          "para_94",
          "para_95",
          "para_96"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Even so, McKinney maintains, the Act’s regulations offer two other paths for imposing",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_98",
          "para_99",
          "para_100",
          "para_101",
          "para_102"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 4",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_104",
          "para_105",
          "para_106",
          "para_107",
          "para_108"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Single employer. These considerations do not show that Sovran and Carlton Manor were",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_110",
          "para_111",
          "para_112",
          "para_113",
          "para_114",
          "para_115"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "233, 245 (3d Cir. 2008) (finding no “dependency of operations” where one company continued",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_117"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "One might argue that the management consultant as a practical matter exercised some",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_119",
          "para_120",
          "para_121",
          "para_122"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Inc., 357 F.3d 1000, 1006 (9th Cir. 2004) (finding “de facto exercise of control” where",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_124",
          "para_125",
          "para_126",
          "para_127"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "But don’t rush to judgment, warns McKinney. Even a 0 for 5 tally, or at best a 1 for 5",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_129",
          "para_130",
          "para_131"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 5",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_133",
          "para_134",
          "para_135",
          "para_136",
          "para_137",
          "para_138",
          "para_139",
          "para_140",
          "para_141"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Separate employers. The regulations refer not just to the possibility of treating two",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_143",
          "para_144",
          "para_145",
          "para_146",
          "para_147",
          "para_148",
          "para_149"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "But this potential path to liability does not help McKinney either. As just shown, the",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_151",
          "para_152",
          "para_153",
          "para_154",
          "para_155",
          "para_156",
          "para_157"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Trying to avoid this conclusion, McKinney invokes cases in which employees of debt-",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_159",
          "para_160"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 6",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_162",
          "para_163",
          "para_164",
          "para_165",
          "para_166",
          "para_167",
          "para_168",
          "para_169",
          "para_170",
          "para_171",
          "para_172",
          "para_173",
          "para_174"
        ]
      },
      {
        "title": "Comparison is the thief of happiness, it’s sometimes said. But comparisons between",
        "paragraphs": [
          "para_176",
          "para_177",
          "para_178",
          "para_179",
          "para_180",
          "para_181",
          "para_182",
          "para_183",
          "para_184",
          "para_185"
        ]
      }
    ],
    "paragraphs": [
      {
        "text": "RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION",
        "paragraph_id": "para_1"
      },
      {
        "text": "Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b)",
        "paragraph_id": "para_2"
      },
      {
        "text": "File Name: 17a0188p.06",
        "paragraph_id": "para_3"
      },
      {
        "text": "UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS",
        "paragraph_id": "para_4"
      },
      {
        "text": "FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT",
        "paragraph_id": "para_5"
      },
      {
        "text": "DEBI MCKINNEY, on behalf of herself and all others",
        "paragraph_id": "para_6"
      },
      {
        "text": "similarly situated,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_7"
      },
      {
        "text": "Plaintiff-Appellant,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_8"
      },
      {
        "text": "v.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_9"
      },
      {
        "text": "CARLTON MANOR NURSING & REHABILITATION",
        "paragraph_id": "para_10"
      },
      {
        "text": "CENTER, INC., et al.,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_11"
      },
      {
        "text": "Defendants,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_12"
      },
      {
        "text": "SOVRAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_13"
      },
      {
        "text": "Defendant-Appellee.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_14"
      },
      {
        "text": "┐",
        "paragraph_id": "para_15"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_16"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_17"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_18"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_19"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_20"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_21"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_22"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_23"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_24"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_25"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_26"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_27"
      },
      {
        "text": "│",
        "paragraph_id": "para_28"
      },
      {
        "text": "┘",
        "paragraph_id": "para_29"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 16-3895",
        "paragraph_id": "para_30"
      },
      {
        "text": "Appeal from the United States District Court",
        "paragraph_id": "para_31"
      },
      {
        "text": "for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_32"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 2:14-cv-00279—Algenon L. Marbley, District Judge.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_33"
      },
      {
        "text": "Argued: August 2, 2017",
        "paragraph_id": "para_34"
      },
      {
        "text": "Decided and Filed: August 18, 2017",
        "paragraph_id": "para_35"
      },
      {
        "text": "Before: SILER, SUTTON, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_36"
      },
      {
        "text": "_________________",
        "paragraph_id": "para_37"
      },
      {
        "text": "COUNSEL",
        "paragraph_id": "para_38"
      },
      {
        "text": "ARGUED: Samuel Heldman, THE GARDNER FIRM, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. ON",
        "paragraph_id": "para_39"
      },
      {
        "text": "BRIEF: Samuel Heldman, THE GARDNER FIRM, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Mary E.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_40"
      },
      {
        "text": "Olsen, M. Vance McCrary, THE GARDNER FIRM, Mobile, Alabama, Kenneth R. Cookson,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_41"
      },
      {
        "text": "KEGLER BROWN HILL & RITTER, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_42"
      },
      {
        "text": ">",
        "paragraph_id": "para_43"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 2",
        "paragraph_id": "para_44"
      },
      {
        "text": "_________________",
        "paragraph_id": "para_45"
      },
      {
        "text": "OPINION",
        "paragraph_id": "para_46"
      },
      {
        "text": "_________________",
        "paragraph_id": "para_47"
      },
      {
        "text": "SUTTON, Circuit Judge. After the Ohio Department of Health cited Carlton Manor",
        "paragraph_id": "para_48"
      },
      {
        "text": "Nursing & Rehabilitation Center for health and safety violations, the nursing home hired Sovran",
        "paragraph_id": "para_49"
      },
      {
        "text": "Management Company to help turn things around. When that did not work, the nursing home",
        "paragraph_id": "para_50"
      },
      {
        "text": "closed its doors for good. Debi McKinney, a former worker at the nursing home, claims that",
        "paragraph_id": "para_51"
      },
      {
        "text": "Sovran owes the nursing home’s employees back pay under the Worker Adjustment and",
        "paragraph_id": "para_52"
      },
      {
        "text": "Retraining Notification Act, which requires “employer[s]” to give their employees 60 days’",
        "paragraph_id": "para_53"
      },
      {
        "text": "notice before they “order” the closing of a company. 29 U.S.C. § 2102. The district court ruled",
        "paragraph_id": "para_54"
      },
      {
        "text": "as a matter of law for Sovran. We affirm.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_55"
      },
      {
        "text": "Most nursing homes seek reimbursement from Medicare or Medicaid for their services.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_56"
      },
      {
        "text": "In return, they must comply with federal health and safety regulations. Both programs represent",
        "paragraph_id": "para_57"
      },
      {
        "text": "a form of cooperative federalism, as they are funded by federal and state money and the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_58"
      },
      {
        "text": "regulations are enforced by federal and state officials. In July 2013, the Ohio Department of",
        "paragraph_id": "para_59"
      },
      {
        "text": "Health cited Carlton Manor for failing to meet 27 of those regulations. It ordered the nursing",
        "paragraph_id": "para_60"
      },
      {
        "text": "home to come into compliance by January 2014, with the warning that it would lose its status as",
        "paragraph_id": "para_61"
      },
      {
        "text": "a Medicare and Medicaid provider if it did not. The nursing home hired Sovran, a management",
        "paragraph_id": "para_62"
      },
      {
        "text": "consultant for nursing homes, to help correct the problems.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_63"
      },
      {
        "text": "By January 2014, the nursing home had resolved 26 of the deficiencies. Yet the 27th, the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_64"
      },
      {
        "text": "physical structure of the building, proved more difficult to fix. In consultation with Sovran, the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_65"
      },
      {
        "text": "nursing home presented the Department with a 12-month plan to repair the building. That was",
        "paragraph_id": "para_66"
      },
      {
        "text": "not enough. In mid-January, the Department rejected the plan and began the process of revoking",
        "paragraph_id": "para_67"
      },
      {
        "text": "the nursing home’s operating license. The nursing home closed soon after.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_68"
      },
      {
        "text": "Carlton Manor gave little notice to its employees about the closure. In response,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_69"
      },
      {
        "text": "McKinney filed this putative class action against the nursing home and Sovran under the Worker",
        "paragraph_id": "para_70"
      },
      {
        "text": "Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, called WARN by those who like acronyms. The",
        "paragraph_id": "para_71"
      },
      {
        "text": "Act requires employers to give employees 60 days’ notice before they close a plant. 29 U.S.C.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_72"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 3",
        "paragraph_id": "para_73"
      },
      {
        "text": "§ 2102. Carlton Manor defaulted, and the court entered a judgment against it. That did not do",
        "paragraph_id": "para_74"
      },
      {
        "text": "the employees much good, because the nursing home had no assets for the employees to collect.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_75"
      },
      {
        "text": "That left Sovran, the only solvent defendant in the case. But that did not help either. The district",
        "paragraph_id": "para_76"
      },
      {
        "text": "court concluded that Sovran was not liable under the Act because the nursing home, not Sovran,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_77"
      },
      {
        "text": "was the employer, and the nursing home, not Sovran, decided to close the facility. As a result,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_78"
      },
      {
        "text": "the district court reasoned, Sovran had no obligation to warn the nursing home workers of the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_79"
      },
      {
        "text": "closing. It granted summary judgment for Sovran and thus had no need to rule on McKinney’s",
        "paragraph_id": "para_80"
      },
      {
        "text": "class certification motion.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_81"
      },
      {
        "text": "This case begins and largely ends with the words of the Act. Section 2102 says: “An",
        "paragraph_id": "para_82"
      },
      {
        "text": "employer shall not order a plant closing or mass layoff until the end of a 60-day period after the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_83"
      },
      {
        "text": "employer serves written notice of such an order” on its employees. 29 U.S.C. § 2102. Section",
        "paragraph_id": "para_84"
      },
      {
        "text": "2104 adds: “Any employer who orders a plant closing or mass layoff in violation of section",
        "paragraph_id": "para_85"
      },
      {
        "text": "2102 of this title shall be liable to each aggrieved employee who suffers an employment loss as a",
        "paragraph_id": "para_86"
      },
      {
        "text": "result of such closing or layoff for” back pay and benefits. 29 U.S.C. § 2104.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_87"
      },
      {
        "text": "Only “employer[s]” that “order” a plant closing face regulation by the Act or liability",
        "paragraph_id": "para_88"
      },
      {
        "text": "under it. That makes considerable sense. The purpose of the Act is to encourage employers to",
        "paragraph_id": "para_89"
      },
      {
        "text": "give their employees notice before closing a company. The entity in the best position to warn",
        "paragraph_id": "para_90"
      },
      {
        "text": "employees about a closing is the employer, who runs the company and who decides to close it.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_91"
      },
      {
        "text": "And the entity from whom the employees will most acutely appreciate any warning about a",
        "paragraph_id": "para_92"
      },
      {
        "text": "closing is the employer. There’s no dispute that Carlton Manor, not Sovran, employed these",
        "paragraph_id": "para_93"
      },
      {
        "text": "individuals, and Carlton Manor, not Sovran, made the final decision to close the nursing home.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_94"
      },
      {
        "text": "That means Sovran does not fit naturally within the terms of the Act. See Administaff Cos. v.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_95"
      },
      {
        "text": "Tow, 337 F.3d 454, 456 (5th Cir. 2003).",
        "paragraph_id": "para_96"
      },
      {
        "text": "Even so, McKinney maintains, the Act’s regulations offer two other paths for imposing",
        "paragraph_id": "para_97"
      },
      {
        "text": "liability on Sovran—either because Sovran and Carlton Manor were in reality a “single",
        "paragraph_id": "para_98"
      },
      {
        "text": "employer” of McKinney or were “separate employers” of McKinney. Appellant’s Br. 11, 15.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_99"
      },
      {
        "text": "The Act’s regulations appear to contemplate each theory of liabililty, and no one challenges their",
        "paragraph_id": "para_100"
      },
      {
        "text": "validity here. “Under existing legal rules,” they say, “independent contractors and subsidiaries[,]",
        "paragraph_id": "para_101"
      },
      {
        "text": "which are wholly or partially owned by a parent company[,] are treated as separate employers or",
        "paragraph_id": "para_102"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 4",
        "paragraph_id": "para_103"
      },
      {
        "text": "as a part of the parent or contracting company depending upon the degree of their independence",
        "paragraph_id": "para_104"
      },
      {
        "text": "from the parent.” 20 C.F.R. § 639.3(a)(2). “Some of the factors to be considered in making this",
        "paragraph_id": "para_105"
      },
      {
        "text": "determination,” the regulation adds, “are (i) common ownership, (ii) common directors and/or",
        "paragraph_id": "para_106"
      },
      {
        "text": "officers, (iii) de facto exercise of control, (iv) unity of personnel policies emanating from a",
        "paragraph_id": "para_107"
      },
      {
        "text": "common source, and (v) the dependency of operations.” Id.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_108"
      },
      {
        "text": "Single employer. These considerations do not show that Sovran and Carlton Manor were",
        "paragraph_id": "para_109"
      },
      {
        "text": "in truth one entity, as opposed to two. Four of the factors do not remotely show that we should",
        "paragraph_id": "para_110"
      },
      {
        "text": "treat Sovran and Carlton Manor as a single employer. There was no common ownership",
        "paragraph_id": "para_111"
      },
      {
        "text": "between the two. The management consultant and the nursing home did not share any directors",
        "paragraph_id": "para_112"
      },
      {
        "text": "or officers. The two companies kept their payrolls separate and did not share any personnel",
        "paragraph_id": "para_113"
      },
      {
        "text": "policies. And no one disputes that Carlton Manor and Sovran operated two distinct businesses",
        "paragraph_id": "para_114"
      },
      {
        "text": "that were not dependent on each other. See In re APA Transp. Corp. Consol. Litig., 541 F.3d",
        "paragraph_id": "para_115"
      },
      {
        "text": "233, 245 (3d Cir. 2008) (finding no “dependency of operations” where one company continued",
        "paragraph_id": "para_116"
      },
      {
        "text": "to operate without incident after the other folded).",
        "paragraph_id": "para_117"
      },
      {
        "text": "One might argue that the management consultant as a practical matter exercised some",
        "paragraph_id": "para_118"
      },
      {
        "text": "“control” over the company in view of the dire straits facing the nursing home. According to one",
        "paragraph_id": "para_119"
      },
      {
        "text": "witness, for example, Sovran had authority to fire employees of the nursing home. But it’s not",
        "paragraph_id": "para_120"
      },
      {
        "text": "clear that this is what “de facto control” means or that it is the kind of thing that would show that",
        "paragraph_id": "para_121"
      },
      {
        "text": "the consultant and nursing home amounted to one employer. See Childress v. Darby Lumber,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_122"
      },
      {
        "text": "Inc., 357 F.3d 1000, 1006 (9th Cir. 2004) (finding “de facto exercise of control” where",
        "paragraph_id": "para_123"
      },
      {
        "text": "management of one company “would ultimately answer to higher management” of the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_124"
      },
      {
        "text": "controlling company). The client in this independent contractor relationship remained the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_125"
      },
      {
        "text": "nursing home, and Sovran remained the consultant. Either way, the outcome remains the same",
        "paragraph_id": "para_126"
      },
      {
        "text": "because the other factors confirm that the two entities remained independent.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_127"
      },
      {
        "text": "But don’t rush to judgment, warns McKinney. Even a 0 for 5 tally, or at best a 1 for 5",
        "paragraph_id": "para_128"
      },
      {
        "text": "tally, does not tell the whole story. No one factor listed in the regulation is controlling, she",
        "paragraph_id": "para_129"
      },
      {
        "text": "points out, and the statute’s remedial purpose should incline us to adopt a “flexible application to",
        "paragraph_id": "para_130"
      },
      {
        "text": "specific circumstances as they arise.” Appellant’s Br. 17–18. To that end, the “overriding” issue",
        "paragraph_id": "para_131"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 5",
        "paragraph_id": "para_132"
      },
      {
        "text": "in her view is the “level of control” used by the independent contractor (here Sovran) in helping",
        "paragraph_id": "para_133"
      },
      {
        "text": "the employer (here Carlton Manor). Id. at 21.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_134"
      },
      {
        "text": "Overriding indeed. It may be true that no one factor in the regulations is dispositive. But",
        "paragraph_id": "para_135"
      },
      {
        "text": "that does not help McKinney because she cannot meet any of the listed factors or at best partially",
        "paragraph_id": "para_136"
      },
      {
        "text": "meets one of them. It may be true that the itemization of five factors does not prevent us from",
        "paragraph_id": "para_137"
      },
      {
        "text": "considering other factors that could show that the two employers were one. But that option still",
        "paragraph_id": "para_138"
      },
      {
        "text": "requires an articulation of distinct considerations, and she has not identified anything beyond the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_139"
      },
      {
        "text": "listed factors. The abstract possibility of identifying other approaches to this question by itself",
        "paragraph_id": "para_140"
      },
      {
        "text": "does not permit us to override the concrete approaches already mentioned.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_141"
      },
      {
        "text": "Separate employers. The regulations refer not just to the possibility of treating two",
        "paragraph_id": "para_142"
      },
      {
        "text": "nominally distinct entities as one entity but also to the possibility of treating each entity as a",
        "paragraph_id": "para_143"
      },
      {
        "text": "distinct employer of the affected individual with independent duties under the Act. There is",
        "paragraph_id": "para_144"
      },
      {
        "text": "plenty of overlap between the two concepts, as confirmed by the reality that the regulations list",
        "paragraph_id": "para_145"
      },
      {
        "text": "the same five factors in addressing both of them. Just as some factors could unveil the lack of",
        "paragraph_id": "para_146"
      },
      {
        "text": "independence between two entities—common ownership, common management, de facto",
        "paragraph_id": "para_147"
      },
      {
        "text": "control of one entity over the other—those same factors also might show that the two entities",
        "paragraph_id": "para_148"
      },
      {
        "text": "each employed the same individual.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_149"
      },
      {
        "text": "But this potential path to liability does not help McKinney either. As just shown, the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_150"
      },
      {
        "text": "regulations’ five factors, whether examined singly or taken together, do not show that Sovran",
        "paragraph_id": "para_151"
      },
      {
        "text": "was a separate employer of McKinney. The one factor that might operate differently in this",
        "paragraph_id": "para_152"
      },
      {
        "text": "setting—“de facto control”—does not change things. There is no evidence that Sovran hired",
        "paragraph_id": "para_153"
      },
      {
        "text": "McKinney, fired McKinney, or otherwise treated her as one of its employees. All of the extant",
        "paragraph_id": "para_154"
      },
      {
        "text": "evidence shows that Carlton Manor hired McKinney and ultimately fired her when the nursing",
        "paragraph_id": "para_155"
      },
      {
        "text": "home closed. And no evidence shows that Sovran “ordered” the closing of the nursing home, as",
        "paragraph_id": "para_156"
      },
      {
        "text": "required by the language of the statute.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_157"
      },
      {
        "text": "Trying to avoid this conclusion, McKinney invokes cases in which employees of debt-",
        "paragraph_id": "para_158"
      },
      {
        "text": "laden corporations sued their employers’ lenders under the Act. See Coppola v. Bear Stearns &",
        "paragraph_id": "para_159"
      },
      {
        "text": "Co., 499 F.3d 144 (2d Cir. 2007); Pearson v. Component Tech. Corp., 247 F.3d 471 (3d Cir.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_160"
      },
      {
        "text": "No. 16-3895 McKinney v. Carlton Manor, et al. Page 6",
        "paragraph_id": "para_161"
      },
      {
        "text": "2001); Chauffeurs, Sales Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers Union Local 572 v. Weslock Corp.,",
        "paragraph_id": "para_162"
      },
      {
        "text": "66 F.3d 241 (9th Cir. 1995). In those cases, McKinney points out, the courts focused on “the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_163"
      },
      {
        "text": "amount of ‘control’ that the lender exercised over the ‘ordinary operations’” of its borrower to",
        "paragraph_id": "para_164"
      },
      {
        "text": "determine whether the lender should be liable to the borrower’s employees. Appellant’s Br. 19.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_165"
      },
      {
        "text": "But those cases use the word “control” in the same sense that the regulations use the words “de",
        "paragraph_id": "para_166"
      },
      {
        "text": "facto control” here—as a proxy for lack of independence. 20 C.F.R. § 639.3. They recognize",
        "paragraph_id": "para_167"
      },
      {
        "text": "that, at least in the lender-borrower context, a lender may exercise such pervasive control over a",
        "paragraph_id": "para_168"
      },
      {
        "text": "delinquent borrower’s business operations (say by exercising its rights under a loan agreement)",
        "paragraph_id": "para_169"
      },
      {
        "text": "that the borrower is no longer “independent” of the lender. See Coppola, 499 F.3d at 148, 150",
        "paragraph_id": "para_170"
      },
      {
        "text": "(lender may exercise such control over the borrower as to become the debtor’s “agent, partner, or",
        "paragraph_id": "para_171"
      },
      {
        "text": "alter ego” or “the de facto owner of an ongoing business”); Pearson, 247 F.3d at 478 (the “nature",
        "paragraph_id": "para_172"
      },
      {
        "text": "and degree of control possessed by the [lender] over the [borrower]” might make it appropriate",
        "paragraph_id": "para_173"
      },
      {
        "text": "to “pierce the veil” under the Act).",
        "paragraph_id": "para_174"
      },
      {
        "text": "Comparison is the thief of happiness, it’s sometimes said. But comparisons between",
        "paragraph_id": "para_175"
      },
      {
        "text": "cases are all we have in law and are at the heart of most legal disputes. McKinney’s comparison",
        "paragraph_id": "para_176"
      },
      {
        "text": "hurts rather than helps her cause. A lender-borrower relationship, in which the loan agreement",
        "paragraph_id": "para_177"
      },
      {
        "text": "allows the lender to take control of a borrower who cannot repay a loan, offers a poor analogy to",
        "paragraph_id": "para_178"
      },
      {
        "text": "a consultant-consultee relationship that is arm’s length from beginning to end. Sovran offered",
        "paragraph_id": "para_179"
      },
      {
        "text": "management advice to Carlton Manor at the nursing home’s behest and did not become the",
        "paragraph_id": "para_180"
      },
      {
        "text": "owner of the nursing home in the process. The consulting arrangement allowed the nursing",
        "paragraph_id": "para_181"
      },
      {
        "text": "home to ask Sovran to leave at any time. And it allowed the management consultant to leave as",
        "paragraph_id": "para_182"
      },
      {
        "text": "well, which is just what it did after helping Carlton Manor make the necessary arrangements to",
        "paragraph_id": "para_183"
      },
      {
        "text": "shut down the nursing home.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_184"
      },
      {
        "text": "For these reasons, we affirm.",
        "paragraph_id": "para_185"
      }
    ],
    "word_count": 2139,
    "cites": [
      "337 F.3d 454",
      "541 F.3d\n233",
      "357 F.3d 1000",
      "499 F.3d 144",
      "247 F.3d 471",
      "66 F.3d 241"
    ],
    "cited_by": [],
    "sha256": "6462e11942929d27af607033133afb96f51f6508f07834710278721d7814d31b",
    "source_url": "http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/17a0188p-06.pdf",
    "fetched_at": "2026-10-07T03:15:15.866+00:00",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/868-f-3d-461",
    "risk_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:868-f-3d-461",
    "relations_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:868-f-3d-461",
    "changes": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes",
    "agent": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:868-f-3d-461",
    "verification": {
      "stored_sha256": "6462e11942929d27af607033133afb96f51f6508f07834710278721d7814d31b",
      "recomputed_sha256": "6462e11942929d27af607033133afb96f51f6508f07834710278721d7814d31b",
      "intact": true,
      "checked_at": "2026-10-11T08:57:10.621Z"
    }
  },
  "hash": "sha256:4d99b0d35f58d610ecd6dab23a80b50a9d73190c38c44b68a58617d3d0178b95",
  "version": "legal-2026-10-11",
  "expires": "2026-10-12T00:00:00.000Z",
  "dependency": {
    "index_version": "legal-2026-10-11+legal-2026-10-11+2026-10-11T08:50:07",
    "content_hash": "sha256:4d99b0d35f58d610ecd6dab23a80b50a9d73190c38c44b68a58617d3d0178b95",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-10-11T09:57:10.751Z",
    "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600,
    "policy": "revalidate-required; attribution-preferred",
    "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency",
    "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify",
    "stale_copy_invalid": true
  },
  "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:868-f-3d-461",
  "follow": [
    {
      "rel": "risk",
      "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:868-f-3d-461"
    },
    {
      "rel": "relations",
      "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:868-f-3d-461"
    },
    {
      "rel": "agent",
      "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:868-f-3d-461"
    },
    {
      "rel": "obligations",
      "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"
    },
    {
      "rel": "changes",
      "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"
    }
  ],
  "disclaimer": "Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.",
  "content_notice": {
    "legal_advice": false,
    "nature": "Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.",
    "kinds": {
      "official_text": "Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted",
      "summary": "Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text",
      "classification": "Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"
    },
    "rule": "Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.",
    "report_error": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections",
    "ai_act_declaration": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"
  },
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering",
  "access_class": "public",
  "access_view": "public"
}