882 F. Supp. 2d 545
S.D.N.Y.2012Background
- Plaintiffs allege trafficking and abuse by Yannai and Fusillo in the US between 2003 and 2009, including coercion, luring with false employment promises, and confinement.
- Yannai was criminally convicted of multiple trafficking-related offenses; Fusillo was not charged.
- Plaintiffs allege extensive labor exploitation and forced dress code, plus ongoing sexual abuse by Yannai.
- Plaintiffs escaped with assistance of others; law enforcement intervened in 2009 to rescue some plaintiffs.
- Plaintiffs filed suit on January 25, 2012 asserting TVPRA, FLSA, NY labor law, and NY common law claims.
- Defendants moved for stay under TVPRA § 1595(b); district court granted stay and ordered preservation of documents during stay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does TVPRA § 1595 require a stay until final adjudication? | Lunkes argues final adjudication triggers stay at verdict. | Yannai argues stay ends at sentencing or appeal resolution. | Final adjudication aligned with sentencing; stay until sentencing/appeal resolution. |
| Scope of stay: applicability to all defendants and all claims? | Stay should apply only to TVPRA claims against Yannai, Fusillo not charged. | Stay should apply to all defendants to avoid discovery overlap with criminal case. | Stay extends to all defendants and all civil claims. |
| Does § 1595 require a protective order to preserve evidence during stay? | A protective order is necessary to prevent alteration/destruction of evidence. | Proposed protective order is vague and unenforceable. | Protective order granted; defendants must preserve all relevant documents and data. |
Key Cases Cited
- Puello v. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, 511 F.3d 324 (2d Cir. 2007) (defines final adjudication in immigration context for TVPRA stay)
- Rodriguez v. United States Department of Homeland Security, 629 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2011) (final adjudication tied to sentencing in immigration context)