Zheng V. Liberty Apparel Company

In: Business and Management

Submitted By ftjones
Words 10036
Pages 41
ZHENG v. LIBERTY APPAREL COMPANY INC 88 91 998 103

No. 02-7826.

Argued: Jan. 16, 2003. -- December 30, 2003
Before: WINTER, LEVAL, and CABRANES, Circuit Judges.

James Reif (Margaret A. Malloy, of counsel), Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss, LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.Michael H. Klein, Kestenbaum, Dannenberg & Klein, LLP, New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellees.Jennifer S. Brand, Assistant Attorney General (M. Patricia Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Daniel J. Chepaitis, Assistant Solicitor General, of counsel, Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, on the brief), Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York, New York, NY, for amicus curiae Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York.Catherine K. Ruckelshaus (Laurence E. Norton, II, Amy Sugimori, of counsel), National Employment Law Project, Inc., New York, NY, for amici curiae Asian-American Legal Defense and Education Fund and National Employment Lawyers' Association.

This case asks us to decide whether garment manufacturers who hired contractors to stitch and finish pieces of clothing were “joint employers” within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and New York law. Plaintiffs, garment workers in New York City who were directly employed by the contractors, claim that the manufacturers were their joint employers because they worked predominantly on the manufacturers' garments, they performed a line-job that was integral to the production of the manufacturer's product, and their work was frequently and directly supervised by the manufacturers' agents. The manufacturers respond that the contractors, who, among other things, hired and paid plaintiffs to assemble clothing for numerous manufacturers, were plaintiffs' sole employers. Both plaintiffs and the manufacturers moved for summary…...

Similar Documents

Apparel

...Solution Saved Sara Lee Intimate Apparel A Quarter Million Dollars in Fees Sara Lee Intimate Apparel, headquartered in Winston-Salem, N.C., has a 70-year tradition of products with fashion, fit, comfort, quality and design. Its founders, Sam and Sara Stein, launched its Bali business in the mid-1920s by combining new raw materials with changing fashion trends accentuating shape. Playtex was developed by a Dupont Chemist after WWII. Sara Lee Intimate Apparel was formed in the late 1980s from the purchase of these two companies. The company’s flagship Bali and Playtex brands, as well as newer Wonderbra and Barely There lines comprise a powerful department and specialty store presence, while its Hanes Her Way, Just My Size and Lovable brands combine to bring superior styling to the mass merchandise market. A sub-division of Sara Lee Branded Apparel, Sara Lee Intimate Apparel manufactures and distributes more than 70 percent of the intimate apparel sold retail and private label in the United States. Because of the differing distribution requirements in the retail markets, the company operates two separate facilities in Kings Mountain, N.C. Combined, the company distributes more than 720,000 garments a day, via 36,000 outbound cartons, to thousands of customer locations, including JC Penney, Kohl’s, Macy’s, Mervyn’s, Sears and Wal-Mart. Bar code labels are affixed to each garment and carton the company ships. Sara Lee Intimate Apparel department store and mass......

Words: 1195 - Pages: 5

Palsgraf V. the Long Island Rsiroad Company

...harm constituting the basis for a claim by the injured party. While some torts are also crimes punishable with imprisonment, the primary aim of tort law is to provide relief for the damages incurred and deter others from committing the same harms. The injured person may sue for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the tortious conduct or for monetary damages. 2. International Tort – a category of torts that describes a civil wrong resulting from an international act. 3. Negligence – Conduct that falls below the standards of behavior established by law for the protection of others against other people. 4. Strict Liability – Liability without fault. Franco Chuquilin Business Law Palsgraf v. The Long Island Railroad Company 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99, Wed 1928 N.Y. Lexis 1269 Court of Appeals of New York, 1928 Key Facts * Mrs. Palsgraf was standing on a Long Island Railroad train platform when two men ran to catch a train.  * The second man was carrying a small package containing fireworks. He was helped aboard the train by one guard on the platform and another on the train. The man dropped the package which exploded when it hit the tracks. * The shock of the explosion caused scales at the other end of the platform many feet away to fall, striking and injuring Palsgraf. *  Palsgraf brought a personal injury lawsuit against Long Island Railroad and the railroad appealed the court’s judgment in favor of Palsgraf. ......

Words: 702 - Pages: 3

Johnson Bank V. George Korbakes & Company, Llp

...Case 51.2 Accountant’s Liability: Johnson Bank v. George Korbakes & Company, LLP Keller School of Management   Case Questions: Critical Legal Thinking Which of the following three legal theories did the Court apply in making its decision in this case? a. Ultramares doctrine b. Section 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Tort c. Foreseeability standard Before we can determine the doctrine used by the court, I would like to first dismiss the ones that do not apply. a. The court could not have used the Ultramares doctrine because GKCO was not in privity relationship with the bank or any other third parties. b. The use of Section 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Tort could have been the court’s only resort to make its decision. GKCO failed to include in the main sections of the financial report figures of great importance. Instead, GKCO included these figures in the report’s footnotes. c. The court could not have used the foreseeability standard. Because the accountant did not prepare the financial reports with the intention of informing Johnson Bank. In fact, GKCO did not know Brandon was intending to use the reports –already done by GKCO- to obtain a loan from Johnson Bank. The Court applied Section 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Tort. This doctrine says that the accountant is liable only for negligence to third parties who are members of a limited class of intended users of the client’s financial statements. (Cheeseman 806) Business Ethics Should GKCO......

Words: 900 - Pages: 4

Eeoc V. Lowe's Companies Inc.

...Lowe's Companies, Inc. Sued for Race Discrimination http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-24-04.html The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 24, 2004 CONTACT: Katharine W. Kores, Regional Attorney (901) 544-1051 Faye Williams, Supervisory Trial Attorney (901) 544-0088 Deidre Smith Senior Trial Attorney (901) 544-0140 TTY: (901) 544-0112 LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC. SUED FOR RACE DISCRIMINATION EEOC Litigation Says Home Improvement Giant Rejected Qualified Black Job Applicants MEMPHIS, Tenn.-- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced the filing of a race discrimination lawsuit under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act against Lowe's Companies, Inc., doing business as Lowe's Home Center's Inc. The suit charges the world's second largest home improvement retailer with failing to hire a class of qualified African American applicants due to their race at its Reload Distribution Center in Vonore, Tenn. The EEOC's lawsuit, Civil Action No. 3-04-CV-133, in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Knoxville Division, charges that Curtis Carter, Tiffany Carter, and a class of African Americans, all qualified applicants, were denied positions in Lowe's Reload Distribution Center between 2002 and 2003 because of their race. The EEOC filed suit after exhausting its conciliation efforts to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement. The lawsuit asks the court to order the company to provide back pay,......

Words: 594 - Pages: 3

United Brands Company V. Commission of the European Union

...COLOGNE BUSINESS SCHOOL (CBS) United Brands Company v. Commission of the European Communities Case 27/76 Coursework for EU Law and Institutions Winter Semester 2013 Lecturer: Dr. Anke Steinhoff Tobias Wilms BA International Business Table of contents Introduction 1. 1.1 1.2 2. 2.1 2.1.1 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 3. F The Existence of a dominant market position The relevant market UBC´s position on the relevant market Abuse of the dominant position Behavior vis-à-vis the ripeners The clause prohibiting the resale of bananas while still green Price policy Discriminatory prices Unfair Prices urther Submissions 4. 5. 6. Relevance of Case 27/76 Reference List Affidavit Introduction History of the United Brands Corporation In the year 1970 the United Brands Company (UBC) was established and registrated in New York after the merger of the United Fruit Company and the American Seal Kap Corporation. In 1974 the multinational corporation became the most powerful corporative actor on the worldmarket of bananas, which accounted for 35% of the worlds export. Its European Subsidiary, United Brands Continentaal B. V. (UBCBV) registered in Rotterdam, was responsible for the distribution of bananas inseveral european countries, with an accumulated market share of 45% in the European Economic Community (EEC). Background of the Case 27/76 Several corporations from different european countries filed a complaint concerning the dominant market position and its abusement of......

Words: 3292 - Pages: 14

Kruse V Coos Head Timber Company

...TITLE AND CITATION: Darwin Kruse, Appellant, v. Coos Head Timber Company, Respondent 432 P.2d 1009 RESEARCH PROCESS: A coworker of mine who attends Duquesne Law School helped me locate this case. I went to the law school library with him to find and print the case from the database. I used Google Scholar and Lexis Nexis to find the article relating to the legal concept this case addresses. NATURE OF THE CONTROVERSY: Darwin Kruse, an employee of Coos Head Timber Company, was suing his employer because he claimed he lacked sufficient mental capacity to understand the compensation agreement he signed after suffering injuries from an accident at work. PROCEDURAL HISTORY: This case was brought before the court because Darwin Kruse, an employee of Coos Head Timber Company, is seeking to recover damages for injuries he suffered as a result of an accident he had at work. Darwin Kruse, the appellant, was removing rock from the inside of a base of an elevator mechanism. While doing so, the tower vibrated and a piece of wood from the top of the tower fell and struck him on the back of the head. After the accident, Mr. Kruse signed a compensation agreement with his employer, Coos Head Timber Company. In the agreement he received compensation for the accident and released his employer from any further claims for damages. Mr. Kruse claimed the agreement should not be enforced because he entered into it under circumstances of fraud and misrepresentation. Mr. Kruse also......

Words: 1717 - Pages: 7

Denny V. Ford Motor Company Case

...based on all of its positives of everyday practical uses and does not go into detail of potential safety issues of this vehicle being engineered basically as an off road vehicle. According to Ford the vehicle had been intended to be used as an off-road vehicle and not designed as a passenger automobile, which is what Nancy Denny had believed she was purchasing, she was not at all interested in it’s off road use. (Halbert/Ingulli, 2012, p 307) There were three grounds in which Nancy Denny approached this legal battle with Ford Motor Company. The first of which was a strict products liability approach. This approach is used when a manufacturer places a product on the market for sale when the product has a defective. The manufacturer becomes liable for injuries suffered as a result of the product being defective when the product was used for its intended or reasonably intended purpose. Therefore, Nancy Denny would need to prove that Ford Motor Company had placed the Bronco II on the market with knowledge that the vehicle had a defect and could cause injuries to its owner. She would do this by pointing out that the vehicle had an extremely low stability index that was attributed to its high center of gravity and narrow track width compared to other passenger vehicles. Nancy Denny also sued Ford, asserting negligence, which ultimately requires a fact finder to make a judgment about Ford’s judgment in selling a product with a known defect. Nancy Denny’s final ground for the......

Words: 794 - Pages: 4

Zheng He

...Zheng He vs. Christopher Columbus When you hear the name Christopher Columbus the first thing that probably comes to your mind is that he was the one who founded America. However, if you actually do some research you will find out that he wasn’t the only one. Evidence shows that there was another man who discovered America seventy years before, Zheng He. He was a Chinese admiral during the Ming Dynasty, who also served as the Ming Dynasty Emperor and leader of seven voyages in the Indian Ocean. Christopher Columbus and Zheng He were both great travelers with great differences in their journey. Columbus’ story is one of great greed and domination while Zheng’s however one of a more noble cause. Very rarely, does the name Zheng He ever come up unless you’re in China. But he was a very important traveler in the world of discovery and he predates many of the more famous explorers. The purpose of his travel and explorations was to display the power of China while also creating better relations with other nations and setting up trade agreements in different parts of the world. One of the things that Zheng He’s voyages are known for is the size of the fleets that he commanded. In all, there were seven voyages headed up by Zheng He, including voyages to East Africa, India, and Arabia. Zheng He and his expedition exemplified the highest level of ancient Chinese propriety in terms of foreign trade. Zheng’s voyage stimulated and inspired the development of overseas trade....

Words: 767 - Pages: 4

Olaes V. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company

...OLAES v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY ISSUE: Can the defendant show that the cause of action triggering the claim is justifiable under the section 425.16, subdivision (e) of the California Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation statute? Facts: In 2001, an employee from Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company complained about unwelcomed comments and touching from a fellow co-worker, Olaes. In May 2003, another woman complained about unwanted touching by the plaintiff, Olaes. Nationwide Mutual terminated Olaes. Olaes filed a complaint alleging Nationwide Mutual falsely accused him of sexual harassment and failed to adequately investigate prior to his termination. Discussion: A female employee of Nationwide Mutual complained about a fellow co-workers unwelcomed advance upon her. Nationwide conducted an investigation of the matter and found another female employee was having the same complaints against the same co-worker, Danny Olaes. Mr. Olaes has filed a lawsuit against Nationwide stating that he was falsely indicted of sexual harassment and Nationwide did not complete a proper investigation before terminating him. Nationwide Mutual followed up with special motion to strike Olaes’s complaint, asserting that the lawsuit arose out of Nationwide’s exercise of its right to free speech on an important public issue, sexual harassment. The trial court denied Nationwide’s motion and Nationwide appealed. The statutory (section 425.16) definition is at question and......

Words: 423 - Pages: 2

Wright's Company and Lilly Li Apparel

...operating effectiveness. Explain your answer for every one of the four reactions. a. The fact that departments were neglecting reports during periods of peak activity definitely has an adverse impact on the company. The dilemma, however, is there are just several reports. b. Considering there is a lot of data being generated, department heads were not accurately reading the reports leading to incorrect decision-making. This can prove to have adverse repercussions on the company. c. The third reaction was the fact that others were reminding management of decisions that were necessary to make because managers did not have the best information to be able to prioritize d. The fourth result was relying on the third parties for information to be able to make decisions. Unlike the other three reactions, this one is a positive one. After all, managers should be resourceful and consider all alternative methods for gathering information when needed. 2. For each reaction that you indicated as negative, recommend alternative procedures the Wright Company could employ to eliminate this negative contribution to operating effectiveness. a. For the first reaction, of neglecting data reports, an annual department audit should be part of the standard procedures for the company. This process would allow reports be updated and modified based on the current department head. b. When department heads/managers are not capable of read reports, then systems should be notified,......

Words: 561 - Pages: 3

Raymond James & Associates, Inc. V. Leonard & Company and Ronald Boerjan

...1. Case Name, Citation, and Court Raymond James & Associates, Inc. v. Leonard & Company, and Ronald Boerjan 411 F. Supp. 2d. 689 (2006) United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division 2. Summary of the Key Facts A. Ronald Boerjan resigned from Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (RJA) on December 23, 2005. B. Boerjan began working with RJA competitor, Leonard & Company. C. Boerjan created his own “posting pages” (book of business) so that he could prepare account transfer forms. The “posting pages” are industry standard and contain the cient’s personal information. D. Boerjan avers that RJA’s CEO told him and others at an October, 2005 meeting that “you own your book” and that they were free to take their book of business with them when they left RJA. E. RJA accused Boerjan of taking trade secrets of their company to the competitor company, to solicit clients. 3. The Issue Can Raymond James & Associates, Inc. succeed in filing a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction towards Ronald Boerjan for taking “trade secrets” (client lists and information) to the competitor company, Leonard & Company? 4. Holding No. 5. Summary of the Court’s Reasoning A. The Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division found that while working for RJA, Boerjan did not sign any non-solicitation or non-compete agreement. He had every right to take the......

Words: 319 - Pages: 2

Zippittelli V. J.C. Penney Company, Inc.

...Zippittelli v. J.C. Penney Company, Inc. The plaintiff, who is 63 years old, brought this employment discrimination suit against her employer, J.C. Penney, after the company failed to promote her to the position of shift operations manager at the company's Moosic, Pennsylvania Customer Service Center. She alleged violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She brought these claims against both the company and the PHRA claims against her supervisor at the Moosic center, James Johnson. She was the first associate hired at the new Customer Service Center in Moosic. James Johnson became personnel manager at the facility in March 1990. Johnson was promoted to manager of the call center in March 1999. After Johnson came to the facility, plaintiff frequently sought promotion to a management position. In 1990, she sought promotion to seasonal shift leader, also known as general lead clerk and was denied both positions. Plaintiff contends that after she complained in 1993 or 1994 to a supervisor about her lack of opportunity for promotion, Johnson told two of her co-workers that plaintiff would "never be promoted while he was there.” This template is formatted according to APA Style guidelines, with one inch top, bottom, left, and right margins; Times New Roman font in 12 point; double-spaced; aligned flush left; and paragraphs indented 5-7 spaces. The page number appears one inch from the right edge on the first line of...

Words: 1097 - Pages: 5

Liberty

...names. All 56 men who ultimately signed the Declaration showed great courage. Announcing independence from Great Britain was an act of treason, punishable by death. A Marvelous Document The Declaration of Independence itself has become one of the most admired and copied political documents of all time. It was written by Thomas Jefferson and revised by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence is a justification of the American Revolution, citing grievances against King George III. It is also a landmark philosophical statement, drawing on the writings of philosophers John Locke andJean Jacques Rousseau. It affirms that since all people are creatures of God, or nature, they have certain natural rights, or liberties, that cannot be violated. The Declaration and the American Revolution have since inspired freedom-seekers the around the world. The History of the 4th of July On July 4, 1776, the thirteen colonies claimed their independence from England, an event which eventually led to the formation of the United States. Each year on July 4th, also known as Independence Day, Americans celebrate this historic event. Conflict between the colonies and England was already a year old when the colonies convened a Continental Congress in Philadelphia in the summer of 1776. In a June 7 session in the Pennsylvania State House (later Independence Hall), Richard Henry Lee of Virginia presented a resolution with the famous words: "Resolved: That these......

Words: 16917 - Pages: 68

Case Study Analysis of Palsgraf V. Long Island Railroad Company

...Case Study Analysis of Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company Michael J. Roberts Liberty University Palsgraf v. Long Island Rail Company is a case where the plaintiff, Ms. Palsgraf, was on one end of a train platform when a package was knocked out of the hands of another passenger who was attempting to board a moving train with the assistance of a guard, the defendant, on the other end of the train platform. The package being knocked out of the passenger’s arms and onto the ground created an explosion which knocked over some scales that were near Ms. Palsgraf and caused harm to her at the opposite end of the train platform. Mr. Palsgraf is taking the Long Island Rail Company, representing the guard on the platform, to court for damages she suffered through the injuries caused by the scale falling on her as a result of the guards assisting another passenger onto the train and knocking the package out which then exploded. Negligence is not a tort unless it results in the commission of a wrong, and the commission of a wrong imports the violation of a right, in this case, we are told, the right to be protected against interference with one’s bodily security. (Edwards, 1999, p. 131) In this case negligence is not a consideration as the guard was unaware of the contents of the passenger and he was doing his duty in protecting the passenger by pushing him onto the train before he fell off and injured himself. Proximate cause concerns arise because it may sometimes......

Words: 858 - Pages: 4

Company Law Lee V Farming Ltd

...Mr Lee incorporated a company, Lee’s Air Farming Ltd, in August 1954 in which he owned all the shares. Mr Lee was also the sole ‘Governing Director’ for life. Thus, as with Mr Salomon, he was in essence a sole trader who now operated through a corporation. Mr Lee was also employed as chief pilot of the company. In March, 1956, while Mr Lee was working, the company plane he was flying stalled and crashed. Mr Lee was killed in the crash leaving a widow and four infant children. The company, as part of its statutory obligations, had been paying an insurance policy to cover claims brought under the Workers’ Compensation Act. The widow claimed she was entitled to compensation under the Act as the widow of a ‘worker’. The issue went first to the New Zealand Court of Appeal who found that he was not a ‘worker’ within the meaning of the Act and so no compensation was payable. The case was appealed to the Privy Council in London. They found that: the company and Mr Lee were distinct legal entities and therefore capable of entering into legal relations with one another, as such they had entered into a contractual relationship for him to be employed as the chief pilot of the company he could in his role of Governing Director give himself orders as chief pilot. It was therefore a master and servant relationship and as such he fitted the definition of ‘worker’ under the Act. The widow was therefore entitled to compensation....

Words: 256 - Pages: 2

Chicken Run 2 An adventure escape | Star Ocean EX | 712,770 CD