Previous Story
Abolished company says it can’t be sued By MAR-VIC CAGURANGAN Staff Reporter
|
Posted on Oct 26 1999
The lawyer for an abolished garment firm is seeking the dismissal of the labor complaint filed by a Chinese worker against the company, saying the case is barred by the two-year statute of limitations.
The American Investment Corporation was one of the 22 garment companies sued in the US District Court of the Northern Marianas for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
AIC was abolished on Jan. 1, 1993, and merged with Pacific International Corporation. The merger has created the Trans-Asia Garment Forte Corporation.
Colin Thompson, lawyer for AIC, said the company has not employed any worker since it closed its doors six years ago.
“A complaint may be properly dismissed on motion for failure to state a claim when the allegations in the complaint affirmatively show that the complaint is barred by the applicable statue of limitation,” Thompson stated in his motion to dismiss.
The lawsuit, filed by the law offices of Milberg Weiss Bershad on behalf of 23 garment workers identified only as Does I to XXIII, alleged nonpayment of regular and overtime pay, and illegal deductions for food and housing, among others.
The original complaint lumped together the workers as a single group suing the defendant companies.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs later amended the complaint to identify the plaintiffs’ employment relationships with their respective employers.
The complaint was amended in response to Federal Judge Alex Munson’s order last month, granting the defendant companies’ motion to break up the class action suit into separate proceedings.
The amended complaint identified Jane Doe XI, a sewer from China, as the complainant for AIC — which the lawsuit described as “predecessor-in-interest” of Trans-Asia Garment Forte.
Thompson, however, said AIC was not designed “as the surviving corporation” of a merger plan. AIC ceased to exist on the day the merger took effect, he added.
In asking the court that the case against AIC be thrown out, Thompson said, “No Doe plaintiffs could have worked for AIC during the past three years since AIC ceased to exist more than six years ago.”
