The following excerpt is from Klem v. County of Santa Clara, 208 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2000):
Defendant also argues that the Secretary's interpretation and the district court's order are inconsistent with Paresi v. City of Portland, 182 F.3d 665 (9th Cir. 1999). In Paresi, we upheld a summary judgment in favor of the City of Portland. The plaintiffs there were City employees who had sought overtime compensation. They argued that they were not exempt because the City had, on two occasions, improperly suspended allegedly exempt employees for less than one full workweek. The plaintiffs argued that the City could not rectify those improper suspensions under the window-ofcorrection rule, because the City had engaged in a pattern of improper deductions.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.