Litigation Docket
Economic Justice
Ke v. Saigon Grill, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.). After a trial in July 2008, a Manhattan federal court awarded $4.6 million to 36 delivery workers for two Saigon Grill restaurants in New York City. The damages were for non-payment of minimum wage and overtime pay. This case was combined with outstanding retaliation claims and two other lawsuits against the restaurants, in a settlement of all the claims and a method to enforce that agreement. (co-counsel Davis, Polk & Wardwell)
Chen v. Jing Fong Restaurant, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.). AALDEF represented 28 waiters and bussers of Jing Fong restaurant in Manhattan's Chinatown, the second case brought by AALDEF against the restaurant. The claims involving the entitlement of food service workers to the service charges paid by banquet customers were favorably resolved. (co-counsel Alterman & Boop)
Eng v. The Nice Restaurant, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.). In the spring of 2007, Nice Restaurant in Manhattan's Chinatown closed when the workers threatened to sue. After discovery, separate settlements were reached with two of the restaurant's owners. A default judgment has been entered against one of the principal owners, who transferred her assets and fled the country. (co-counsel Skadden, Arps)
Dong v. CCW Fashion Inc. (S.D.N.Y.). AALDEF has obtained default judgments against garment factory owners for the non-payment of overtime. The factory had previously agreed with the N.Y.S. Department of Labor to pay for these violations but then defaulted on the payments. DOL would not pursue the claims because the factory had changed corporate names.
David v. Signal (E.D. La). AALDEF represents 500 Indian H2B workers in an action against their former employer, Signal International, and its labor recruiters and attorneys for human trafficking, involuntary servitude, discrimination, and civil RICO violations. Signal claims that a labor shortage after Hurricane Katrina forced it to recruit workers from India to work as welders and fitters at its shipbuilding facilities in the Gulf region. The suit alleges that as part of the recruitment process, the workers were promised green cards if they took the job at Signal. For this "opportunity," the workers each paid approximately $10,000 to $20,000, only to realize upon their arrival to the United States that the promises of green cards were false. A hearing on class certification will be held in August 2010. (co-counsel Dewey LeBoeuf, Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU with Louisiana Justice Institute, local counsel)
Ryu v. Ji Ji Nails, Inc. (D.N.J.). AALDEF filed a federal lawsuit and charges with the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of four Korean workers who worked at various nail salons in Northern New Jersey owned by Ji Ji Nails, Inc. The workers labored up to 12 hours per day, sometimes as many as 6 days per week, performing manicures, pedicures, and massages. Their employers failed to pay the workers the proper minimum wage for much of their employment, and never paid the workers overtime at all. Moreover, their employers discriminated against the workers by assigning customers out of turn. When the workers complained about the discriminatory practices, the employers fired two of the workers in retaliation.
In re Charlie Brown's. AALDEF has filed charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of former employees of Charlie Brown's steakhouse chain. The charges allege that Charlie Brown's intentionally discriminated against its Chinese kitchen workers by underpaying them when the business did not meet its budget quotas. The charges also allege that Charlie Brown's discriminatorily fired numerous Chinese kitchen workers en masse and replaced them with workers of Latino descent.
Immigrant Rights
Badrawi vs. Dept. of Homeland Security (D.Conn.). AALDEF represents a Middle Eastern immigrant who was unlawfully arrested, placed into removal proceedings, jailed, held for two months, and ultimately removed from the United States despite still being in legal status. On April 12, 2011, the federal district court ruled that the government may not arrest H-1B employees whose extension applications were filed on time and still pending. In a 56-page opinion, the court found that a federal regulation allows H-1B immigrants to continue working for 240 days pending the adjudication of their extension applications. (co-counsel Yale Law School Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic)
BBadrawi-opinion-2011-4-11.pdfadrawi-opinion-2011-4-11.pdf
Educational Equity
Oung v. Lowell School Committee. The Massachusetts Court of Appeals upheld earlier lower court and arbitration decisions ordering the Lowell School Committee to reinstate two Cambodian American teachers and one Puerto Rican teacher with full back pay, seniority, and benefits. School administrators had singled out non-native English speaking educators in 2003 to take English fluency tests and then dismissed them for allegedly failing these flawed tests. The veteran teachers returned to the classroom in March 2007. The teachers collected a portion of their judgment of 3 years' back pay in January 2009 after the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts declined to take the case for further appellate review. A second arbitration was resolved in our favor and the parties received the balance of their judgment in Feb. and May 2010. We are now preparing to return to Superior Court to seek a substantial amount of post-judgment interest that has accrued due to Lowell's failure to pay the complete judgment for over 3 years. (co-counsel Weil Gotshal & Manges)
South Philadelphia High School Anti-Asian Harassment Campaign. Following assaults on December 3, 2009, in which over two dozen Asian students at South Philadelphia High School (SPHS) were attacked throughout the day, AALDEF filed an administrative complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) alleging "deliberate indifference" to the persistent and pervasive anti-Asian harassment at the school. Since 2008, AALDEF documented and reported numerous incidents of physical harassment against Asian students at SPHS with little or no response from SPHS and School District officials. Since filing the complaint, AALDEF has assisted the DOJ in its investigation, providing documentary evidence and arranging interviews with students, teachers and community advocates. AALDEF has also filed administrative civil rights complaints with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PA-HRC) on behalf of three community organizations and five Asian immigrant students.
Human Trafficking
Baoanan v. Baja (S.D.N.Y.). After securing a T Visa for Ms. Baoanan, who was trafficked to the U.S. by a former Philippine United Nations ambassador and his wife, AALDEF filed a complaint for Ms. Baoanan's back wages against the Bajas, their adult daughter, and Mrs. Baja's travel agency, Labaire. The Court rejected the Bajas' assertion of diplomatic immunity. An evidentiary hearing on the issue of the Court's personal jurisdiction over Labaire was held in August 2010. (co-counsel Troutman Sanders)
Samirah v. Sabhnani (E.D.N.Y.). After a federal jury found Varsha and Mahender Sabhnani guilty of slavery and trafficking of two Indonesian domestic workers for several years in their Long Island home, AALDEF filed a civil action on behalf of the workers against the Sabhnanis for violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, federal and state employment laws, and tort law. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed the criminal convictions of the Sabhnanis. In July 2010, AALDEF moved for summary judgment on behalf of the workers. (co-counsel Fish & Richardson)
Voting Rights
Georgia v. Holder (DC Dist. Ct.). AALDEF intervened in the State of Georgia's challenge to the constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and criticized the state's racially discriminatory voter verification procedures. AALDEF, representing an Asian American voter and two community groups, contended that the new procedures have disenfranchised Asian American voters, who were incorrectly flagged as non-citizens. (co-counsel Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy)
Amicus Briefs
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Mukasey (U.S. Sup. Ct.). In response to a challenge to key provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act, AALDEF submitted an amicus brief in support of the enforcement provisions of the Act. AALDEF's brief discussed the history of anti-Asian voter discrimination and the need for continued enforcement to protect the right to vote. In June 2009, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. (co-counsel Proskauer Rose)
Horne v. Flores (U.S. Sup. Ct.). AALDEF filed an amicus brief to support English language learners' (ELL) rights under the Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 (EEOA). The Arizona state education department and legislature challenged a 2001 judgment in favor of ELL students, arguing that an EEOA violation cannot be sustained when No Child Left Behind standards are met and that the federal courts have overstepped their bounds to interfere with state and local policymakers' decisions. AALDEF represented Asian American youth groups in our National Asian American Education Advocates Network and local Arizona-based Asian American advocates. In June 2009, the Supreme Court decided the case on other grounds, rejecting Arizona's challenge to the EEOA based on its compliance with NCLB. (co-counsel Covington & Burling)
Friendly House v. Whiting (AZ Dist. Ct.). AALDEF and other organizations filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge to Arizona's controversial attempt to enforce federal immigration laws through SB1070 and other provisions, which will lead to racial and ethnic profiling.
Samadov v. Attorney General (3d Cir.). AALDEF joined an amicus brief challenging anti-Muslim bias in the Immigration Court and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) with regards to Mr. Samadov's asylum case. Although the Immigration Judge (IJ) found that Mr. Samadov, a national of Uzbekistan, would be persecuted if he were deported from the United States, he was denied asylum and withholding of removal because the Judge held that he presented "an actual danger to national security." While the government admitted that it possessed no evidence that Mr. Samadov had engaged in terrorist activity of any kind, the IJ and BIA still ruled against Mr. Samadov based on stereotypical inferences and assumptions that Muslims in the United States are insular and inherently dangerous. Citing AALDEF's amicus brief, the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the IJ's decision and granted withholding of removal to Samadov.
Swarna v. Al-Awadi (2d Cir.) AALDEF and the ACLU filed an amicus brief in February 2010 in support of Ms. Swarna, a former domestic worker for a Kuwaiti diplomat and his wife, in opposition to the defendants' claim of diplomatic immunity. AALDEF argued that the defendants are not entitled to immunity for the treatment of their domestic worker, but only for acts done in their capacity as diplomats. In September 2010, the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that the diplomat and his wife were not protected by "residual diplomatic immunity" under the Vienna Convention.
