characterization and states that no one is “the boss per se.” (Affidavit of Jerry Eller “Eller Aff.” ¶ 14.) Additionally, Eller has been present for every corporate meeting of Eller and Sons Trees that generated minutes, and he personally signed all corporate minutes. He was involved in the decision to downsize the company in 2005 and was also involved in the decision to set up another company as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Eller and Sons Trees. Eller has participated in addressing workshop safety at Eller and Sons Trees and participates in vehicle purchases and sales. On occasion, Eller has even planted trees himself. All of these facts support the conclusion that Eller was the employer of Plaintiffs, opt-in Plaintiffs, and the Rule 23(b)(3) class members. See Patel, 803 F.2d at 638 (<HOLDING>); Donovan, 747 F.2d at 972 (noting that the
holding that liability in a  1983 action must be predicated on personal involvement not on the basis of respondeat superior holding that a likelihood that the suspect will escape supports a finding of exigency holding that officers involvement in daytoday operations supports finding of personal liability holding that the absence of legitimate income supports the finding of probable cause in a forfeiture action holding that individual liability under  1983 must be based on personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violation