Kim v. Choi
Case Details
- Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
- 710 Labor: Fair Standards
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Unknown
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- consent decree
- State
- New York
- Circuit
- Second Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
Plaintiffs Sara Kim and Angelo Duva settled their FLSA minimum wage claims against defendants Stephen Choi, Christine Tripi, and St. Vince Group LLC (East Village Tavern/DayTripper) for $11,000 via confession of judgment, with FLSA claims dismissed with prejudice and state-law claims to proceed in state court.
What This Ruling Means
Kim v. Choi: Wage Theft Settlement
What Happened
Two workers, Sara Kim and Angelo Duva, filed a lawsuit against their employer, St. Vince Group LLC (which operates East Village Tavern and DayTripper), and its owners Stephen Choi and Christine Tripi. The workers claimed they were not paid the required minimum wage—a violation of federal labor law.
What the Court Decided
Rather than go to trial, both sides reached a settlement agreement. The employer agreed to pay the workers $11,000 in damages. The federal wage theft claims were dismissed, though the workers retained the right to pursue additional claims under New York state labor laws in state court.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that workers can successfully challenge wage theft, even when employers are small businesses or restaurants. The settlement demonstrates that violations are taken seriously and employers may face financial consequences. Workers who believe they weren't paid fairly should document their hours and report violations to authorities or consult with employment advocates.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 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.