Shi v. TL & CG Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:19-cv-08502
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shi v. TL & CG Inc., Judge Netburn ordered briefs on whether Shi has standing to sue over New York wage-law violations.
Yuefeng Shi and the defendants in the case, including TL & CG Inc.; the order required the parties to brief whether Shi has standing to pursue the specified New York Labor Law claims.
What happened
Shi v. TL & CG Inc. concerns whether Yuefeng Shi may bring claims based on alleged violations of New York Labor Law sections 195(1) and 195(3). The opinion does not state the underlying facts of those alleged violations.
The court noted that the Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff must suffer concrete harm from a statutory violation to sue a private defendant in federal court. It also cited decisions finding that technical violations of New York’s wage-notice and wage-statement requirements, standing alone, may not establish the required standing.
The court did not decide whether Shi has standing. Judge Sarah Netburn ordered the parties to submit simultaneous letter briefs, each no longer than three pages, addressing that question by June 15, 2022.
The detailed version
- Shi v. TL & CG Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-08502
- Jesse Furman
- June 9, 2022
What the order addresses
The order raises a threshold question: whether Plaintiff Yuefeng Shi has Article III standing to bring claims against TL & CG Inc. and other defendants for alleged violations of New York Labor Law sections 195(1) and 195(3). Article III standing is the constitutional requirement that a plaintiff show a sufficient concrete injury to bring a case in federal court.
Court’s discussion
The court cited the Supreme Court’s holding in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez that only plaintiffs who have been concretely harmed by a defendant’s statutory violation may sue that private defendant in federal court. The court also cited decisions from other federal courts in New York concluding that allegations of merely technical violations of New York’s wage-notice and wage-statement requirements may be insufficient, by themselves, to establish Article III standing.
Action taken
The court did not decide whether Shi has standing. Instead, it ordered the parties to submit simultaneous letter briefs, no more than three pages each, addressing whether Shi has Article III standing to bring the claims under New York Labor Law sections 195(1) and 195(3). The briefs were due by June 15, 2022.
What the order does not decide
The order does not resolve the merits of Shi’s wage-law claims or state whether the alleged violations occurred. It also does not state a final disposition of the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.