Dayton Haworth v. State of Nevada, Dayton Haworth v. State of Nevada

56 F.3d 71 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Dayton HAWORTH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. STATE of Nevada, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Dayton HAWORTH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. STATE of Nevada, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 93-16972, 94-16561. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 6, 1995. * Decided May 24, 1995. Before: BRUNETTI, THOMPSON and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 In a separately filed opinion in Case No. 94-16561, we vacated and remanded the district court's award of attorney fees and costs to the plaintiffs-appellants. Haworth v. Nevada, F.3d (9th Cir. 1995). In this memorandum disposition in Case No. 93-16972, we affirm the district court's judgment on the merits of the plaintiffs-appellants' Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claims. 3 In anticipation of the FLSA's application to the states in 1986, Nevada negotiated an agreement with the cottage couples. The cottage couples now attack this…