The University of Michigan Law School

         The University of Michigan Law School
 
HomeClinical ProgramsHuman Trafficking CasesCase Display

Case View

 Case Documents

There are no documents to display for this case.

 Case Links - links to external documents

Link to Document

 
Case Details

  
CASE NAME:Juana Sierra Trejo v. Broadway Plaza Hotel
ALL PLAINTIFFS:Juana Sierra Trejo, Gabriela Flores Viegas, Ines Bello Castillo, Carmen Calixto Rodriquez, Lucero Santes Vazquez
ALL DEFENDANTS:Broadway Plaza Hotel, Felix David Buendia Ramirez, Salvatore Loduca, Philip Lozia
CITATION:
DOCKET NUMBER:04-04005
SOURCE:Bloomberg, Lexis Search, News Article, Non-DOJ Press Release
TYPE OF CASE:Civil
RELATED CASE CITATION:
TYPE OF TRIAL:
TRIAL JUDGE(S):Laura Taylor Swain, Douglas F. Eaton
YEAR OF ARREST:2004
YEAR OF VERDICT:2006
TYPE OF COURT:Federal
STATE:New York
FEDERAL DISTRICT:Southern District Court
STATE COUNTY:
AGE OF VICTIM(S):Adult and Minor
NUMBER OF VICTIMS:5
GENDER OF VICTIM(S):Female
VICTIM'S COUNTRY OF ORIGIN:
METHOD OF ENTRY INTO THE U.S.:
WAS VICTIM CHARGED WITH A CRIME:
NUMBER OF DEFENDANT(S):4
GENDER OF DEFENDANT(S):Male
TYPE OF INDUSTRY:Labor
CASE CATEGORIZATION:Hotel Industry
FIRST CHARGE:
FIRST CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIRST CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FIRST CHARGE SENTENCE:
SECOND CHARGE:
SECOND CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
SECOND CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
SECOND CHARGE SENTENCE:
THIRD CHARGE:
THIRD CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
THIRD CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
THIRD CHARGE SENTENCE:
FOURTH CHARGE:
FOURTH CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FOURTH CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FOURTH CHARGE SENTENCE:
FIFTH CHARGE:
FIFTH CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIFTH CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FIFTH CHARGE SENTENCE:
CORE TERMS:
SENTENCING OPINION CITATION:
LENGTH OF GREATEST SENTENCE:
RESTITUTION REQUIRED:
FINE IMPOSED:
FORFEITURE IMPOSED:
FIRST CLAIM:Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act
FIRST CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq.
FIRST CLAIM RESULT:Settled
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FIRST CLAIM:
SECOND CLAIM:Violations of the New York Labor Law
SECOND CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:New York Labor Law Article 6, §§ 190 et seq. and Article 19, §§ 650 et seq.
SECOND CLAIM RESULT:Settled
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR SECOND CLAIM:
THIRD CLAIM:Forced Labor
THIRD CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (18 U.S.C. §§ 1581 et seq.)
THIRD CLAIM RESULT:Settled
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR THIRD CLAIM:
FOURTH CLAIM:Sex Discrimination, Retaliation
FOURTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION: 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 et seq., N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-107(1) et seq.
FOURTH CLAIM RESULT:Settled
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FOURTH CLAIM:
FIFTH CLAIM:Fraudulent Inducement, Quantum Meruit, Unjust Enrichment, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Negligent Hiring, Retention, and Supervision
FIFTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIFTH CLAIM RESULT:Settled
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FIFTH CLAIM:
SIXTH CLAIM:
SIXTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
SIXTH CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR SIXTH CLAIM:
TOTAL AWARD:
APPEAL:
EXPLANATION OF APPEAL:
APPELLATE OPINION CITATION:
HOLDING OF APPEALS COURT:
APPEAL STILL PENDING?:
SUMMARY:Defendants, a hotel and its management, hired the five victims to clean hotel rooms.  Defendants told the victims that their work would entail cleaning rooms for 8-hours per day, 6 days per week and that the victims would receive roughly $250 per week.  However, once employed, the victims were regularly required to work 7 days per week, often for 15 hours per day.  They were denied any meal or bathroom breaks during working hours.  After working hours, the victims were often required to clean Defendants homes and assist Defendants with miscellaneous errands.  The victims were never compensated for any overtime work.  The victims were denied time off, sexually harassed, verbally abused, and threatened with deportation.

The parties settled the case.
Approval Status:Approved
Approver Comments:
            
EDIT

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michigan Law Wordmark Print View