Wing v. NongHyup Bank
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-09630
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Wing v. NongHyup Bank, Judge Caproni granted arbitration, stayed Wing’s employment case, and required quarterly updates.
Christina Wing and NongHyup Bank. Wing’s employment claims must proceed in arbitration, and the federal court action is stayed while that process is pending.
What happened
Christina Wing sued her former employer, NongHyup Bank, alleging unlawful employment practices under federal, state, and New York City laws.
The Bank asked the court to require arbitration and dismiss the case. Wing acknowledged that she signed an arbitration agreement covering her employment-related legal disputes and did not challenge its validity or applicability to her claims.
Judge Valerie Caproni granted the Bank’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed the case while arbitration proceeds. The parties must file joint updates every three months; the order did not dismiss the action.
The detailed version
- Wing v. NongHyup Bank · No. 1:20-cv-09630
- Valerie Caproni
- June 29, 2021
Background
Christina Wing filed a complaint against her former employer, NongHyup Bank, alleging unlawful employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the New York State Human Rights Act, and the New York City Human Rights Act. The opinion states that Wing began working for the Bank on August 2, 2018.
Arbitration Agreement
The Bank moved to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint. Wing did not dispute that she signed an arbitration agreement when she was hired. The agreement covered “[a]ny and all alleged legal disputes” relating to her employment. Wing also did not dispute that the agreement was enforceable and applied to the claims in this case, and she identified no basis for finding it invalid, revocable, or unenforceable.
Wing complained that the Bank had refused to engage in other alternative dispute resolution for more than a year. But she also asked the court to stay the action while arbitration was resolved, which acknowledged that the agreement applied. The court cited the Federal Arbitration Act, a federal law governing arbitration, and explained that when all claims are referred to arbitration and a party requests a stay, the court must stay the proceedings rather than dismiss the action.
Ruling
Judge Valerie Caproni granted the Bank’s motion to compel arbitration. She further ordered that the action be stayed pending arbitration. The parties must submit joint updates on the arbitration’s status every three months, with the first update due October 1, 2021, and later updates due on the first business day of the applicable month. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the open motion at docket entry 15. The order does not decide whether Wing’s employment claims are legally valid.
Effect of the Order
The dispute was directed to arbitration instead of being decided at that point by the district court. The action remained stayed pending the arbitration.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.