discussed Cited "see" Axness v. Aqreva LLC See Bryson v. Middlefield Volunteer Fire Department, Inc., 656 F.3d 348, 352 (6th Cir.2011) (quoting Simpson v. Ernst & Young, 100 F.3d 436, 439 (6th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1248 , 117 S.Ct. 1862 , 137 L.Ed.2d 1062 (1997).) (“Whether the Department is an ‘employer’ for purposes of Title VII, ‘[i]n the absence of a conflict of material fact, ... is appropriate for the court to resolve ... as a matter of law’’”) (emphasis added).

discussed Cited "see" Jotham Clement Johnson v. City of Saline See Birchem v. Knights of Columbus, 116 F.3d 310, 312-13 (8th Cir.1997) (applying Darden to ADA). 17 In a recent case, we applied Darden instead of Lilley, but recognized that in practice there is not much difference between the two standards--both consider the entire relationship, with the most important factor being the "employer's ability to control job performance and employment opportunities of the aggrieved individual." Simpson v. Ernst & Young, 100 F.3d 436, 442 (6th Cir.1996), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 1862 , 137 L.Ed.2d 1062 (1997).

cited Cited "see" Margarita SERAPION, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Fred H. MARTINEZ, Et Al., Defendants, Appellees See Simpson v. Ernst & Young, 100 F.3d 436, 443 (6th Cir.1996), cert. denied, U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 1862 , 137 L.Ed.2d 1062 (1997); Wheeler, 825 F.2d at 263 ; accord EEOC Decision No. 85-4, 2 Empl.

cited Cited "see" Serapion v. Martinez See Simpson v. Ernst & Young, 100 F.3d 436, 443 (6th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 1862 (1997); Wheeler, 825 F.2d at 263 ; accord EEOC Decision No. 85-4, 2 Empl.