779 F. Supp. 2d 60
D.D.C.2011Background
- Plaintiff Araceli Dotarot Montuya worked as a domestic servant for Defendants Antoine Chedid, the Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, and Afife Nicole Chedid, his wife.
- Montuya alleges she performed gardening, cleaning, cooking, and child care, averaging long hours and days without minimum wage compensation though a contract with State Department allegedly pledged payment.
- She asserts retaliation through verbal abuse, confinement in Defendants' home, and other discriminatory or abusive conduct.
- Plaintiff asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, DC minimum wage law, and various common law theories (breach of contract, misrepresentation, false imprisonment, IIED) plus human rights-related claims.
- Defendants move to dismiss and quash service on the grounds of diplomatic immunity.
- Court must determine whether Defendants have diplomatic immunity and whether any exception applies that would negate immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants have diplomatic immunity | Montuya argues immunity does not apply to employment claims. | Chedids contend they hold diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention and the Diplomatic Relations Act. | Yes; defendants entitled to diplomatic immunity unless an exception applies. |
| Whether the 'commercial activity' exception to immunity applies | Montuya asserts employment as a domestic servant is commercial activity outside official functions. | Chedids rely on State Department views that hiring domestic workers is not commercial activity under the VCDR. | No; the commercial activity exception does not apply. |
| What governs the determination of diplomatic status and whether immunity should be preserved | Montuya challenges immunity status, seeking redress in court. | State Department determinations establish diplomatic status and immunity governs. | Immunity is determined by State Department status and remains unless an exception applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez Paredes v. Vila, 479 F. Supp. 2d 187 (D.D.C. 2007) (diplomatic employment not commercial activity; State Dept. view persuasive)
- Sabbithi v. Al Saleh, 605 F. Supp. 2d 122 (D.D.C. 2009) (domestic workers' hiring not commercial activity; immunity applies)
- Tabion v. Mufti, 73 F.3d 535 (4th Cir. 1996) (commercial activity exception focuses on trade; daily life services incidental)