Zhang v. New Beijing Wok, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:17-cv-09465
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Zhang v. New Beijing Wok, Judge Caproni entered wage-and-hour judgments, interest, fees, and costs for Zhang and Yao.
Baoji Zhang and Guo Dong Yao received judgments, prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. New Beijing Wok, Inc., Chai Wai Cheng, Shanghai Inc., and Mei Kam Siu were made liable in the amounts specified by the order, with Shanghai Inc. and Mei Kam Siu jointly and severally responsible for specified portions.
What happened
In Zhang v. New Beijing Wok, the court described a jury trial and prior rulings establishing liability against the defendants. The jury found that Shanghai Chinese employed Baoji Zhang and Guo Dong Yao and that the defendants did not violate wage-and-hour laws in good faith.
The court awarded Zhang a $158,794.02 judgment and Yao a $127,409.40 judgment against Beijing Wok. It also awarded prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs, with Shanghai Chinese jointly responsible for specified portions of the judgments, interest, and fees and jointly responsible for all attorneys’ costs.
Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the Clerk to enter the judgment and terminate the case. The court also set the interest calculation dates, approved specified hourly attorney rates, allowed fees for an unsuccessful conditional-certification motion, and reduced certain complaint-drafting time from 11.23 hours to 7 hours.
The detailed version
- Zhang v. New Beijing Wok, Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-09465
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 3, 2020
Background
The court presided over a jury trial from December 2 through December 4, 2019. It had entered judgment as a matter of law in the plaintiffs’ favor against New Beijing Wok, Inc. and Chai Wai Cheng, collectively called “Beijing Wok” for liability purposes, and against Shanghai Inc. and Mei Kam Siu, collectively called “Shanghai Chinese” for liability purposes.
The jury was asked whether Shanghai Chinese employed the plaintiffs and whether the defendants violated wage-and-hour laws in good faith. It found that Shanghai Chinese employed Baoji Zhang on May 24, 2015, and Guo Dong Yao on December 22, 2013, and that the defendants did not violate the wage-and-hour laws in good faith.
Judgments and prejudgment interest
The court accepted the parties’ mutually agreeable damages proposals but determined how prejudgment interest would be allocated between Beijing Wok and Shanghai Chinese. Applying New York law, the court used a nine-percent annual interest rate. It stated that prejudgment interest is calculated on unpaid wages, not liquidated damages, and is not available for wage-statement or wage-notice violations.
The court awarded:
- Baoji Zhang: $158,794.02 against Beijing Wok, with Shanghai Chinese jointly and severally liable for $3,342.16. - Baoji Zhang: $41,595.55 in prejudgment interest against Beijing Wok, with Shanghai Chinese jointly and severally liable for $296.93. - Guo Dong Yao: $127,409.40 against Beijing Wok, with Shanghai Chinese jointly and severally liable for $2,485.66. - Guo Dong Yao: $32,821.94 in prejudgment interest against Beijing Wok, with Shanghai Chinese jointly and severally liable for $129.27.
For the interest owed by Beijing Wok, the court selected October 10, 2014, as a reasonable intermediate date for both plaintiffs and calculated interest through the December 4, 2019, verdict. For the interest owed by Shanghai Chinese, it used May 24, 2015, for Zhang and December 22, 2013, for Yao, also through the verdict date.
Attorneys’ fees and costs
The plaintiffs sought attorneys’ fees and costs, and the defendants opposed the application. The court held that Beijing Wok’s and Shanghai Chinese’s fee liabilities should be apportioned according to their relative liabilities for wage-and-hour violations, but that their costs would not be apportioned.
The court allowed the plaintiffs to recover fees for their unsuccessful motion for conditional certification. It declined to remove 4.55 hours related to specified people and entities. The court approved hourly rates of $400 for Mr. Troy, $225 for Mr. Byun and Mr. Schweitzer, and $100 for Ms. Huang and Ms. Kilaru. It found that 11.23 hours spent drafting and revising a predominantly boilerplate complaint was unreasonable and reduced that time to 7 hours; otherwise, it found the time and cost records reasonable despite minor uncertainties.
The court awarded the plaintiffs $71,176.75 in attorneys’ fees, with Shanghai Chinese jointly and severally liable for $1,234.37. It also awarded $4,703.64 in attorneys’ costs from Beijing Wok and Shanghai Chinese, jointly and severally.
Disposition
Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the Clerk of Court to enter judgment as described above and terminate the case.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.