Weng v. New Shanghai Deluxe Corp
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
- State
- New York
- Circuit
- Second Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
Plaintiffs prevailed on all wage-and-hour claims under the FLSA and New York Labor Law. The court awarded $609,075.65 to Jie Weng and $452,305.18 to San Dang Wang in damages, plus $69,830 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in costs.
What This Ruling Means
Weng v. New Shanghai Deluxe Corp: Court Rules for Workers on Wage Violations
What Happened
Two workers, Jie Weng and San Dang Wang, sued their employer, New Shanghai Deluxe Corp, claiming the company failed to pay them properly for their work. They alleged the employer violated federal and New York state wage laws by not compensating them correctly for hours worked.
The Court's Decision
The court sided completely with the workers. The judge found that New Shanghai Deluxe Corp had indeed broken wage-and-hour laws. The company was ordered to pay Jie Weng $609,075.65 and San Dang Wang $452,305.18 in damages. The employer also had to cover $69,830 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in court costs, totaling over $1 million.
Why This Matters
This ruling demonstrates that courts take wage theft seriously and will hold employers accountable. Workers who believe their employer underpaid them can pursue legal action. Winning cases like this one help protect workers' rights to fair compensation and show that violations have real financial consequences for employers.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
More Rulings in This Case
Other orders and opinions in Weng from the same court.
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.