In Narayan v EGL, Inc. , the plaintiffs were drivers hired in California by a Texas firm, which had them sign independent contractor agreements under Texas law. They sued, contending they were employees, entitled to overtime pay and other benefits, and summary judgment was entered against them because of the independent contractor agreement. They appealed, and on appeal, the court ruled:

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The court ruled that summary judgment was vacated and the case was remanded for trial, since a jury could determine from the evidence that the drivers were employees. This means that neither A nor B were correct, and the court did not definitively determine whether the drivers were employees or independent contractors. The court ruled that summary judgment was vacated and the case was remanded for trial because a jury could determine from the evidence presented that the drivers were employees, despite having signed the independent contractor agreement. The court did not find that the drivers were independent contractors simply because they signed the agreement or that Texas law did not apply in California.

In Narayan V EGL, Inc