Tag Archives: Lawsuits

by | July 28, 2013 · 6:25 am

Hospitality Industry Safety Risks: Ohio Hotel Sued For “Negligence” By Family Of Security Guard Stabbed To Death By Homeless Man; “Unlocked Outside Stairwell Doors” Posed Safety Threat

“…(the suit claims) the  hotel was obligated to provide a safe place for its employees to work, (but) the outside stairwell doors were left unlocked as Hotel Wrongful Death Lawsuitspart of hotel  policy…the suit claims the  hotel’s employees routinely left exit doors to the stairwells unlocked from the  outside, and the family’s attorney said this allowed the homeless (man) to come inside and sleep…the  safety threat posed by the unlocked doors was foreseeable and should have been  prevented…”

The family of a security guard who was stabbed to death while on duty has sued  the hotel where he worked. Richard Campbell was  stabbed to death on his 58th birthday, Dec. 7, when he confronted a man in the  stairwell of the Hilton Netherland Plaza in downtown Cincinnati. Joseph Tucker pleaded  guilty last month to one count of murder in the slaying and was sentenced to 15  years to life in prison.

Tucker said he was high on  marijuana and drunk at the time, and he said he’s not sure why he stabbed  Campbell. Police said Tucker was in  the process of stealing something when the security guard confronted  him. Campbell’s brothers and  sisters filed a lawsuit Tuesday in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court, claiming  the hotel was negligent.

Read more: http://www.wlwt.com/news/local-news/cincinnati/family-of-slain-security-guard-sues-hotel/-/13549970/21181176/-/qbalbyz/-/index.html#ixzz2aLjd0nBP

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Safety Risks: Ohio Hotel Sued For “Negligence” By Family Of Security Guard Stabbed To Death By Homeless Man; “Unlocked Outside Stairwell Doors” Posed Safety Threat

Filed under Crime, Guest Issues, Injuries, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Maintenance

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | July 27, 2013 · 5:48 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Sued For $1 Million By Customer Who “Slipped And Fell On Peanut Shells” On The Floor; Claims “Unreasonably Dangerous Condition”

“…The lawsuit states that (the plaintiff) slipped and fell in the restaurant on March 19, and that the restaurant and employees knew or should Hospitality Industry Injury Lawsuitshave known that the peanut shells on the floor created an unreasonably dangerous condition…(she) is suing for damages for physical pain, mental anguish, physical impairment, medical expenses, lost wages, loss of earning capacity and court costs…”

A Harlingen woman is seeking $1 million after she claims she slipped and fell on peanut shells on the floor of a local restaurant. Amelia Tijerina has filed a civil lawsuit arguing that Texas RoadHouse Inc. is responsible for the peanut shells on the restaurant’s floor. RoadHouse has denied Tijerina’s allegations and demands proof.

Tijerina sued the restaurant in state district court, but Texas RoadHouse moved the lawsuit to federal court, according to court records.

She also maintains that the restaurant or employees should have warned her about the peanut shells or should have removed them.

She is presented by Attorney Salvador Garcia and Jorge A. Green with The Green Law Firm of Brownsville.

Attorneys Karl W. Koen, Robert J. Collins, and Rachel R. Vulpitta of Gauntt, Earl, Binney & Koen, LLP of Dallas, who represent Texas RoadHouse, contend that it was Tijerina’s own actions or omissions that caused or contributed to her injury.

For more:  http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_3296dd56-f669-11e2-a706-0019bb30f31a.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Sued For $1 Million By Customer Who “Slipped And Fell On Peanut Shells” On The Floor; Claims “Unreasonably Dangerous Condition”

Filed under Guest Issues, Injuries, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | July 24, 2013 · 5:37 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: North Carolina Hotel Group Settles “Religious Discrimination” Lawsuit With EEOC For $45,000; Refused To Provide “Religious Accomodation” To Employee

“…The EEOC’s suit charged that the hotel group refused to provide Claudia Neal, a Seventh-Day Adventist, with a religious accommodation of not having to work on her Sabbath, which is from sundown on Friday until sundown on Saturday.  Neal began EEOCworking at the hotel in May 2009.  Initially, Neal’s request not to work on her Sabbath was honored.  However, a change in management occurred in October 2010, and in November of that year, the hotel group refused to provide her with a religious accommodation, and fired her…”

A hotel group which owns and operates the Comfort Inn Oceanfront South in Nags Head, N.C., has agreed to pay $45,000 and provide substantial additional relief to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on religion.  The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Eastern Division (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Landmark Hotel Group, LLC d/b/a Comfort Inn Oceanfront South; Dare Hospitality, LLC d/b/a Comfort Inn Oceanfront South; Jain and Associates, LP d/b/a Comfort Inn Oceanfront South; and JRS Partners, LLC d/b/a Comfort Inn Oceanfront South; Civil Action No. 4:12-cv-158) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

In addition to providing monetary relief to Neal, the hotel group will implement policies designed to prevent religious discrimination and conduct training on anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws.  The hotel group will also provide reports to the EEOC regarding future requests for religious accommodation.

“Employers need to understand their obligation to balance the conduct of their business with employees’ needs and rights to practice their religion,” said Lynette A. Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Charlotte District Office. “Where there is minimal impact on the business, those religious needs must be accommodated.  No person should ever be forced to choose between her religion and her job.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/7-23-13.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: North Carolina Hotel Group Settles “Religious Discrimination” Lawsuit With EEOC For $45,000; Refused To Provide “Religious Accomodation” To Employee

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | July 17, 2013 · 7:56 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Hawaii Hotels Violate State Law In Collecting Tips And Service Charges And Not Passing It On To Employees; State Supreme Court Rules Workers Can Also Collect Damages

 “Legal experts say they’re likely settle the cases for millions of dollars since the hotels do not contest the amount of tip money that they took Hospitality Industry Wage Violation Lawsuitsin…Some of the hotels have already settle cases or were hit by adverse rulings. They include the Fairmont Hotel on the Big Island which paid $2.2 million and the Pacific Beach and Pagoda hotels, which paid a total of $2 million…the ruling came in the case involving two Maui hotels: the Wailea Marriott Resort and the Westin Maui. Several banquet service workers alleged in their lawsuit that the hotels imposed a 20 percent service charge but did not distribute the proceeds to workers…”

For years, Hawaii hotels regularly collected millions of dollars in tips from customers but only passed a portion of those service fees to the employees who earned them. Under a ruling by the Supreme Court today, that practice now violates Hawaii law. The high court said hotels and other businesses can only collect the tips if they disclose that they are going to keep some of the money.

Attorneys who filed class-action lawsuits on behalf of the employees say the hotels are liable for big damages. “I would say it’s going to be north of $10 million. we have $3 million on one hotel on Kauai alone,” said attorney John Perkin, whose firm has filed eight of these suits.

Boston attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan, whose firm is also handling eight different class-actions against Hawaii hotels, said the ruling has broad applications beyond the hospitality industry.

“This will affect the food and beverage industry in Hawaii,” she said. “It will affect hotels, restaurants and other food and beverage establishments, catering companies, country clubs.” The cases are potentially costly because the ruling says that hotel workers can collect damages of up two times the amount in tips that the hotels took.

For more:  http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/22848740/hotel-workers-could-get-millions-from-lost-tips

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Hawaii Hotels Violate State Law In Collecting Tips And Service Charges And Not Passing It On To Employees; State Supreme Court Rules Workers Can Also Collect Damages

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , ,

by | July 12, 2013 · 6:12 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Maryland Hotel Group Sued By EEOC For “Pay Discrimination Based On Sex”; “Female Worker Paid Lower Wages”

“…Despite her years of similar experience at another hotel before she started work at Extended Stay Hotels and her five years of good job EEOCperformance at the hotel, the hotel paid newly hired male employees more money than it paid to Weaver, even though they performed substantially equal work, the EEOC charged. According to the lawsuit, the hotel paid a class of female guest services representatives lower wages than those paid to their male counterparts for performing equal work…”

A leading hotel chain, Extended Stay Hotels, unlawfully paid female employees lower wages than those paid to male employees for performing equal work, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it announced today. According to the EEOC’s suit, Latoya Weaver worked as a guest services representative at the hotel’s Lexington Park, Md., location. Her duties included answering the telephone, making reservations and checking guests in and out.

Such alleged conduct violates the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. HVM L.L.C., D/B/A Extended Stay Hotels, Civil Action No. 8:13-cv-01980) in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Greenbelt Division after first attempting to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The EEOC is seeking injunctive relief prohibiting Extended Stay Hotels from paying female employees less compensation than their male counterparts for performing equal work, equitable relief that provides equal employment opportunities for women, as well as lost wages, compensatory and punitive damages and other affirmative relief for Weaver and other similarly situated female employees who were harmed by the hotel’s discriminatory conduct.

“Although we have made great strides in narrowing the wage gap between men and women, this case demonstrates that pay discrimination remains a serious problem in the workplace,” said District Director Spencer H. Lewis, Jr. of the EEOC’s Philadelphia District Office.

EEOC Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence added, “It is disturbing that even as we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the EPA, some employers persist in paying women less than men for equal work simply because of their gender. The EEOC will take vigorous action to remedy sex-based wage discrimination.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/7-11-13a.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Maryland Hotel Group Sued By EEOC For “Pay Discrimination Based On Sex”; “Female Worker Paid Lower Wages”

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | July 11, 2013 · 5:07 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Kansas Hotel Group Settles “Employee Termination” Lawsuit With Dept. Of Labor For $22,000 In Wages, Damages; “Workplace Safety Concerns Raised”

“…In addition to paying the back wages and compensatory damages to the former employee, True North will expunge all references to disciplinary action and termination from his personnel file and provide a written, neutral job reference, should any prospective Hospitality Industry Termination Lawsuitsemployer seek a reference for the worker…Employers must understand that every employee has the right to raise workplace safety and health concerns without fear of retaliation or termination,” said Marthe Kent, OSHA’s New England regional administrator. “When employees are fearful or reluctant to raise these issues with their employers, hazardous conditions could go undetected until employees are injured or sickened…”

As part of an enterprise wide settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of Labor, True North Hotel Group Inc., a hotel management company based in Overland Park, Kan., will pay $22,225 in back wages and compensatory damages to a former employee who was terminated from a Massachusetts location after raising workplace safety concerns. The company will also educate all its managers and notify its employees nationwide about workers’ whistleblower rights under the Occupational Safety and Health Act as administered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The worker then filed a whistleblower complaint with OSHA, which investigated and found merit to the complaint. True North has elected to settle the matter by taking corrective action.

Specifically, True North will immediately post the whistleblower fact sheet and OSHA poster, in English and Spanish, in conspicuous locations at all of its work premises nationwide, where they can be seen and read by all employees. It will also provide annual training on whistleblower rights and employer responsibilities to all managers and supervisors and provide training materials to all newly hired or promoted managers.

For more:  http://www.workerscompensation.com/compnewsnetwork/workers-comp-blogwire/17039-employer-faces-heavy-fines-for-terminating-whistleblower-employee.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Kansas Hotel Group Settles “Employee Termination” Lawsuit With Dept. Of Labor For $22,000 In Wages, Damages; “Workplace Safety Concerns Raised”

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | July 3, 2013 · 12:21 pm

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: North Carolina Franchise Restaurant Sued By EEOC For “Pregnancy Discrimination”; Refused To Hire Woman Who Was Six Months Pregnant

“…(the plaintiff) interviewed for a team member position with the restaurant’s owner at the restaurant around Nov. 16, 2012…at the time of the interview Morrison was six months pregnant.  During the interview, the owner asked Morrison a series of pregnancy-related questions such as EEOChow many months she had been pregnant; when she was expected to deliver; her childcare plans after giving birth; and how much maternity leave she planned to take…”

“Working women who choose to have children cannot be penalized or treated differently from other employees simply because they are pregnant,” said Lynette A. Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Charlotte District Office.  “Employers must remember that refusing to hire a woman because she is pregnant violates federal law, and the EEOC will enforce that law.”

A Chick-fil-A franchise restaurant violated federal law when it refused to hire a female job applicant because she was pregnant, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed today.

According to the EEOC’s complaint, John Charping, d/b/a Chick-fil-A at Concord Commons, refused to hire Heather Morrison because she was pregnant.    Although Morrison felt that the owner’s questions were inappropriate, she answered them because she wanted the job.  Three days after the interview, the owner called Morrison and informed her that she would not be hired.  The owner told Morrison to call back after she had the baby and had childcare in place.  The EEOC argues that Chick-fil-A at Concord Commons denied Morrison a job because she was pregnant.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA).  The EEOC filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. John Charping d/b/a Chick-fil-A at Concord Commons, Civil Action No.1:13-CV-00535), after first attempting to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement through the agency’s conciliation process.  The suit seeks back pay, compensatory damages and punitive damages for Morrison, as well as injunctive relief.

EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney Tina Burnside added, “Pregnant women must be treated in the same manner as other applicants, and employers should not make inquiries related to pregnancy or deny a woman a job based on pregnancy.”

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment. Further information about the Commission is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/6-2-13a.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: North Carolina Franchise Restaurant Sued By EEOC For “Pregnancy Discrimination”; Refused To Hire Woman Who Was Six Months Pregnant

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | June 27, 2013 · 6:25 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Massachusetts Restaurant Faces “Disabilities Lawsuit” After Terminating Employee With Cystic Fibrosis

“…(the plaintiff) claims she told her boss on March 28, 2012, that she would be late for work the Hospitality Industry ADA Lawsuitsfollowing day since “a nurse would be coming to her house to draw blood to check her medication levels.”…That was the first time Connell had mentioned her cystic fibrosis to any of her supervisors, the lawsuit says. It does state, though, that a manager overseeing her was aware of her cystic fibrosis and was encouraged to keep that information private…”

Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. was sued on Monday by a former employee claiming the company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1991. According to the Boston Business Journal, the plaintiff, Amanda Connell, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts. Connell has cystic fibrosis and was hired to work for the company in December 2011. She worked as a crew member at the Franklin, Mass., location.

When she showed up for work on March 29, 2012, with a shunt showing partly in her arm — it was for a “peripherally inserted central catheter” — the suit says she was questioned by her boss and another manager. Connell explained that it was “for the treatment of lung disease.”

According to the suit, Connell was terminated from her job at Chipotle Mexican grill the next day.

The company has declined to comment on the incident with a spokesman saying they will not speak, pending legal action.

For more:  http://www.ibtimes.com/former-employee-sues-chipotle-after-she-says-she-was-fired-having-cystic-fibrosis-1324995

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Massachusetts Restaurant Faces “Disabilities Lawsuit” After Terminating Employee With Cystic Fibrosis

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | June 21, 2013 · 6:26 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: South Carolina Hotel And Manager Sued For “Sexual Harassment”; Created “Hostile Environment”, Failed To Discipline

“…(the plaintiffs) claim Charleston Plaza “woefully failed in its duty” to provide a non-hostile and productive work environment free from Hospitality Industry Harassment Lawsuitssexual harassment by failing to discipline, monitor or take appropriate action against Lewis when it first learned of his sexual harassment…Charleston Plaza failed in its duty to exercise reasonable care in supervising the employment of Lewis and by failing to act in a reasonable manner to prevent subsequent tortious conduct from occurring; failed to make clear to its employees that the company took its sexual harassment policy seriously; and negligently, recklessly and intentionally retained Lewis as an employee and exposed (plaintiffs) to Lewis’ offensive conduct, according to the suits…”

Two women say their former employer caused a hostile work environment and caused them damages. Penta Charleston B LLC, which is doing business as Charleston Plaza Hotel, and Andrew Lewis were named as defendants in the suit.

From 2011 to 2012, Lewis created a hostile work environment by making grabbing Cassandra Chapman and Marie Foster in front of hotel guests’ making lewd and sexual comments  about guests and co-workers; and making racial comments about African-American co-workers, according to a complaint filed May 30 in Kanawha Circuit Court.

Chapman and Foster claim they continually expressed to the district manager that Lewis’ sexual comments were unwelcome and unwanted and that his abusive conduct was interfering with their ability to adequately perform their jobs.

For more:  http://wvrecord.com/news/260766-women-say-charleston-plaza-hotel-is-a-hostile-work-environment

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: South Carolina Hotel And Manager Sued For “Sexual Harassment”; Created “Hostile Environment”, Failed To Discipline

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | June 7, 2013 · 5:51 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Hotel Management Must Evaluate And Prepare For Potential “Punitive Damage Claims” In Lawsuits Arising From Privacy, Over Service Of Alcohol And Criminal Actions Of Employees

“…the No. 1 priority is effective case evaluation and resolution. Early factual investigation is critical in determining what happened, why it happened and who was involved. Knowing and preserving the correct version of facts and events with effective reporting mechanisms is essential Hospitality Industry Lawsuitto knowing what kind of claim possibly can be presented and what kind of exposure exists…”

“…it is critical to evaluate the potential punitive exposure early and assess the potential for a punitive claim to get to a jury. Always consider the risk that punitive damages may get to a jury, how a jury will receive the evidence and whether your hotel could be punished by a jury that is attempting to make a statement that these incidents will not be tolerated…”

Hoteliers may face the problematic public-relations case that contains a punitive damages claim. These claims include: invasion of privacy, inappropriate surveillance, over service of alcohol, and criminal actions of employees and third parties. These cases are difficult for members of the hospitality industry who pride themselves on showing customers a positive experience, want good feedback and want customers to return to their hotel.

Securing and preserving evidence, which includes photographs, videos, an accident report, incident statement and/or witness statements must be undertaken to document what the incident involves. If photographs and videos are not preserved once a hotel has notice of a claim, a court could instruct the jury that they can infer the hotel destroyed the evidence for a reason. It is critical to use technology to best find and preserve evidence. No potential accident can be overlooked as a hospitality group never knows what accidents can turn into a possible lawsuit.

For more:  http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Articles.aspx/10625/How-to-respond-to-punitive-damages-claims

2 Comments

Filed under Claims, Employment Practices Liability, Guest Issues, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,