Skip to main content

Liu v. Little Saigon Cuisine Inc.

E.D.N.Y.February 6, 2023No. 1:18-cv-02181
Mixed ResultLittle Saigon Cuisine Inc.$7,500 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Labor: Fair Standards
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
bench trial

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage TheftFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

Plaintiff prevailed on two recordkeeping claims under New York Labor Law (failure to provide wage notice and wage statements) and was awarded $7,500 in statutory damages, but lost on all FLSA claims and three NYLL wage claims. The court awarded $15,781.25 in attorney's fees and $2,214.34 in costs.

What This Ruling Means

**The Dispute** Employee Liu filed a lawsuit against Little Saigon Cuisine Inc., a restaurant, claiming the company violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA is the federal law that sets rules for minimum wage, overtime pay, and other workplace standards. While the specific details aren't provided, FLSA violations in restaurants typically involve issues like not paying proper overtime rates, working employees "off the clock," or failing to pay minimum wage. **The Court's Decision** The outcome of this case is not available from the court records provided. The case was filed in February 2023 in federal court in New York's Eastern District, but whether it was settled, dismissed, or went to trial is unknown. **What This Means for Workers** This case highlights that restaurant workers have legal protections under federal law. The FLSA gives employees the right to file lawsuits when employers don't follow wage and hour rules. Restaurant workers, who often face wage violations, can take legal action to recover unpaid wages and overtime. Even when case outcomes aren't public, these lawsuits demonstrate that workers can challenge unfair pay practices through the court system.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win
James Chappel v. Laboratory Corporation of America, AKA National Health Lab
9th CircuitNov 2000
Mixed Result
Wright
10th CircuitAug 2001
Defendant Win

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.