Lin v. Yuri Sushi Inc

Background

Tingyao Lin and Tingjia Xie, who worked as delivery workers at Yuri Sushi, sued Yuri Sushi Inc., Sophia Lian, Ling Tao Lian, Yuri Sushi House, LLC, and Yixiang Cao. They alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law based on unpaid or insufficient minimum-wage and overtime compensation. Yuri Sushi and Yixiang Cao had not appeared; the opinion states that questions remained about whether they had been properly served, so they either had not been served or were in default.

Sophia Lian and Ling Tao Lian, acting without lawyers, moved for summary judgment. They asked the court to rule that neither of them was an employer of the plaintiffs under the federal or New York wage laws. Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang recommended denying the motion as to Sophia Lian and granting it as to Ling Tao Lian. Sophia Lian filed objections to the recommendation.

Legal Standard

Summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence shows that there is no genuine dispute about a fact that could affect the result and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. In deciding whether someone is an employer under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law, courts apply an “economic reality” test. The listed factors include whether the person could hire or fire workers, supervised or controlled their schedules or working conditions, determined their pay, and kept employment records. Courts may also consider whether the person exercised functional control over the workers.

Court’s Analysis

The court reviewed the portions of the magistrate judge’s recommendation that Sophia Lian challenged from the beginning and reviewed the rest for clear error. It adopted the recommendation in full and decided the summary-judgment motion on the merits despite the defendants’ failure to file the required separate statement of undisputed facts. The court relied on the record and construed the submissions of the defendants, who were without lawyers, liberally.

As to Sophia Lian, the court found genuine disputes about material facts. She did not hire the plaintiffs because she had not yet started working at Yuri Sushi when they were hired, but she testified that she hired and fired other employees and set and kept records of the pay and hours of employees she hired. Tingyao Lin testified that Sophia Lian directed him to help prepare ginger and wasabi when the restaurant was busy instead of taking breaks between deliveries. The evidence also conflicted about ownership and control: Sophia Lian testified that Yixiang Cao owned and operated Yuri Sushi, while Tingyao Lin testified that Sophia Lian purchased it in 2016. Sophia Lian also claimed that Cao set delivery workers’ schedules and payment methods. Because these facts were disputed and some evidence weighed in favor of treating her as an employer, the court denied summary judgment as to her.

As to Ling Tao Lian, the court found no dispute about any material fact. The plaintiffs identified no evidence that he was their employer, and the sworn testimony of the four deponents was consistent that he had minimal, if any, interaction with the plaintiffs and did not act as their employer or supervisor. The court therefore granted summary judgment as to him.

Disposition

The court adopted Magistrate Judge Wang’s report in its entirety, overruled Sophia Lian’s objections, denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to Sophia Lian, and granted the motion as to Ling Tao Lian. Judge George B. Daniels entered the order.