Chen v. Shanghai Cafe Deluxe, Inc.

Background

Cindy Chen brought an age-discrimination case against Shanghai Cafe Deluxe, Inc., doing business as Shanghai Café, and Yili Weng, Ping Lin, and Xinsheng Gu. Chen alleged that Shanghai Café terminated her waitress employment after a vacation because the defendants wanted only younger waitresses or waitstaff. She asserted claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law.

The defendants initially answered and defended the case. They later moved for summary judgment. In a prior ruling, the court dismissed Chen’s federal age-discrimination claims against the individual defendants because the federal statute does not impose individual liability, and it granted summary judgment to Ping Lin on all claims. The court also dismissed claims based on discriminatory terms and conditions of employment, while allowing discriminatory-termination claims to continue against Shanghai Café under all three laws and against Weng and Gu under the New York state and city laws.

After the defendants’ lawyer withdrew, the defendants did not obtain new counsel, stopped participating, and did not oppose Chen’s renewed motion for default judgment. A default judgment is a judgment entered when a party fails to defend; for liability, the court accepts well-pleaded allegations as true, but it requires evidence supporting the amount of damages.

Liability

The court entered default judgment against Shanghai Café on Chen’s termination claims under the federal, state, and city age-discrimination laws. Chen alleged that Shanghai Café had at least 20 employees, that she was 54 and qualified for her job, that she was terminated, and that people with hiring and firing authority said they wanted younger waitresses. Because Shanghai Café defaulted, it did not provide a nondiscriminatory explanation for the termination.

The court also entered default judgment against Weng and Gu on Chen’s state and city age-discrimination claims. The allegations credited by the court stated that Weng and Gu owned the restaurant or had authority over hiring and firing, supervised employees, and participated in statements expressing a preference for younger workers. The federal age-discrimination claim did not remain against those individuals.

Damages

The court determined damages without holding a hearing because Chen’s submissions provided the necessary information and the defendants did not contest them. It calculated projected earnings from the date of termination through the judgment and reduced that amount by Chen’s earnings from later jobs.

The court awarded Chen $207,367.65 in back pay. It awarded the same amount in liquidated damages under the federal age-discrimination law after finding that the allegations and supporting affidavits suggested a willful violation, meaning conduct showing knowledge of or reckless disregard for the law.

The court awarded $25,000 for emotional distress. It found that Chen’s evidence supported a garden-variety emotional-distress claim, based primarily on insomnia, stress, and embarrassment, but did not include medical testimony or documentation supporting a more substantial claim. The back-pay, liquidated-damages, and emotional-distress awards totaled $439,735.30.

The court directed calculation of prejudgment interest on $232,367.65, representing back pay and emotional-distress damages. It ordered that interest be calculated using the federal rate referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 1961, allocated over the period from Chen’s termination to entry of the order and compounded annually. The court also awarded post-judgment interest at the federal rate from entry of judgment until payment.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Chen requested $76,766.50 in attorneys’ fees and $1,423.85 in costs. The court reduced the requested hourly rates and reduced the billed hours by 15%, citing excessive, duplicative, vague, or inadequately supported time entries. It awarded $31,198.79 in attorneys’ fees.

The court awarded $400 in costs for the filing fee. It denied the remaining requested costs because Chen did not provide documentation supporting them.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Figueredo entered default judgment against Shanghai Café, Weng, and Gu. The order awarded Chen $439,735.30 in back pay, liquidated damages, and emotional-distress damages; $31,198.79 in attorneys’ fees; $400 in costs; and applicable prejudgment and post-judgment interest. The order also directed Chen to serve the defendants and file proof of service by March 31, 2023.