Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro
United States Supreme Court
136 S. Ct. 2117 (2016)
Relevant factsFree
After decades of interpreting the FLSA's vehicle-sales-and-service overtime exemption to cover service advisors like Navarro (plaintiff), an interpretation the industry had come to rely on, the Department of Labor issued a 2011 regulation reversing course with only a summary, conclusory discussion rather than a reasoned explanation for the change; Navarro sued Encino (defendant) for FLSA overtime violations, the district court dismissed based on the exemption, and the Ninth Circuit reversed after granting the new regulation Chevron deference.
IssueFree
Whether an administrative agency's regulation is entitled to Chevron deference if the regulation is procedurally defective.
Related cases
Friedman v. FAA841 F.3d 537 (2016)American Immigration Lawyers Association v. Executive Office for Immigration Review830 F.3d 667 (2016)Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Gordon819 F.3d 1179 (2016)Pikula v. Department of Social Services138 A.3d 212 (2016)Olivares v. Transportation Security Administration819 F.3d 454 (2016)