Yu v. Shanghai Dumpling, Inc.

Background

Su Ping Yu, a former waitress, alleged that she was terminated because of her age and retaliated against after providing an affidavit supporting coworker Cindy Chen’s age-discrimination claims. Yu asserted claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL).

The defendants were Shanghai Café Deluxe, Inc.; Shanghai Dumpling, Inc.; Shanghai Soup Dumpling, Inc.; Yili Weng; Ping Lin; and Xinsheng Gu. The opinion states that the three companies were related as successors or predecessor entities and that Weng, Lin, and Gu supervised Yu and had hiring and firing authority. All defendants defaulted, and Shanghai Dumpling separately failed to defend the action after being warned that its answer could be struck.

Default and Liability

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55, default judgment is a judgment entered when a defendant fails to plead or otherwise defend. The court explained that a default admits well-pleaded liability allegations, but not the amount of damages. The court must still determine whether the admitted allegations establish legal liability.

The court struck Shanghai Dumpling’s answer. It then found that Yu’s allegations established a prima facie ADEA age-discrimination claim: she was over 40, qualified for her job, suffered termination, and alleged circumstances supporting an inference of age discrimination. The court relied in part on Gu’s statement that the restaurant would employ “young employees only, not the old ones anymore,” as well as the allegation that a younger person later took over Yu’s former position.

The court also found an ADEA retaliation claim. Yu’s affidavit supporting Chen’s age-discrimination claims was protected activity, the defendants knew about it, and Yu’s termination approximately two months later supported a causal connection. Because the defendants defaulted, they did not offer a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the termination.

The court held the corporate defendants liable under the NYSHRL and NYCHRL as well as the ADEA. For individual liability, the court found that the allegations established Gu’s liability for age discrimination under the NYSHRL and NYCHRL and Weng’s liability for retaliation under the NYCHRL. The court stated that the complaint did not adequately allege that Lin actively participated in discriminatory conduct and did not find Lin individually liable.

Disposition

The court granted Yu default judgment against Shanghai Café Deluxe, Shanghai Dumpling, and Shanghai Soup Dumpling on her ADEA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL claims. It also granted default judgment against Weng and Gu for the NYSHRL and NYCHRL claims identified in the court’s liability determination. The court ordered that judgment be entered in Yu’s favor against the corporate defendants, Gu, and Weng in accordance with those findings.

The court did not yet award damages. Yu requested back pay, punitive or liquidated damages, emotional-distress damages, interest, attorney’s fees, and costs. The court ordered the defendants to show cause in writing by June 16, 2023, why the requested damages should not be granted.