Legal Opinion
Pijanowski v. Yuma County
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided April 2, 2002No. 1 CA-CV 00-0482PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SULT, Judge.
BACKGROUND
¶ 1 Appellants are present and former deputy sheriffs employed by Yuma County. They sued appellees Yuma County, its board of supervisors, and its sheriff, contending that the County violated Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) § 23-392 (Supp.2001) by paying overtime to its deputies only when they worked more than 171 hours in a 28-day cycle. Section 23-392 requires payment of overtime to law enforcement agents after completion of 40 hours of work in a one-week cycle.
¶2 Appellees asserted that the County’s overtime policy was permitted by A.R.S. § 11-251(38)…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Lemons v. Superior Court of Gila CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- Arnold Const. Co., Inc. v. Arizona Board of RegentsArizona Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. WeibleArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- Webb v. DixonArizona Supreme Court · 1969
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Boston v. Commonwealth Employment Relations BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
- Roberts v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2021
- Clinton Roberts v. State of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 2022