Lin v. Yuri Sushi Inc

Background

Tingyao Lin and Tingjia Xie brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, New York Labor Law, and related New York regulations against Yuri Sushi, Inc., doing business as “Yuri Sushi”; Yuri Sushi House, LLC, also doing business as “Yuri Sushi”; Yixiang Cao; Sophia Lian; and Ling Tao Lian. After the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding Cao and Yuri Sushi House, LLC, they sought default judgment against the Yuri Sushi defendants and Cao, as well as attorneys’ fees.

Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang recommended granting the motions in part and denying them in part. No party objected. Judge Daniels reviewed the unchallenged portions of the recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted the recommendation.

Service of Process

The court held that service on Yuri Sushi, Inc. was improper. The plaintiffs were required to serve the amended complaint because that company had not yet been formally found in default when the amended complaint was filed. The papers were delivered to “Lin Doe,” later identified as Sophia Lian, at the business. But the plaintiffs’ affidavit did not provide enough facts showing that Lian was an officer, managing agent, general agent, or other authorized recipient for service on the corporation. The court distinguished Lian’s possible status as an employer under wage law from the separate question of whether she had authority to accept service. The court therefore denied default judgment as to Yuri Sushi, Inc.

The court reached the same conclusion for Yuri Sushi House, LLC. The record did not show that Lian was a member, manager, or otherwise authorized agent who could accept service for the limited liability company. The court therefore denied default judgment as to Yuri Sushi House, LLC.

The court held that service on Cao was proper. The plaintiffs represented that the papers were delivered to a person of suitable age and discretion at the Yuri Sushi restaurant, which the court treated as Cao’s actual place of business. The plaintiffs also represented that the papers were routinely mailed by first-class mail. Based on those representations, the court found that the plaintiffs were entitled to the presumption that service on Cao was proper.

Default Judgment and Attorneys’ Fees

Because Cao had been properly served, had failed to respond to the amended complaint, and had not appeared, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment as to Cao. The court entered judgment for Lin and Xie against Cao, including statutory pre- and post-judgment interest, and referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Wang for an inquest to determine damages.

The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees without prejudice. Under the rule cited by the court, a fees motion must be filed within 14 days after judgment is entered. Because judgment had not yet been entered when the plaintiffs filed their motion, the court found the motion premature and allowed renewal after final judgment as to Cao.

Disposition

The motion for default judgment was denied as to Yuri Sushi, Inc. and Yuri Sushi House, LLC and granted as to Cao. The motion for attorneys’ fees was denied without prejudice. The court directed the Clerk to close the two motions.