Monday, December 19, 2016

Case of the Day: Thoa Nguyen v. La. State Bd. of Cosmetology, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174550 (M.D. La. Dec. 16, 2016)


The suit is from a group of Vietnamese American nail salon owners against the Louisiana Board of Cosmetology and individual who are affiliated with the board. One of the individual defendant, an attorney for the Board, sought to dismiss based on government immunity. 

The court dismissed the claims of most of the plaintiffs, but found that as to one of the plaintiffs the immunity did not apply because the attorney acted as both a prosecutor and an investigator--because the attorney had her legal assistant visit the nail salon as a customer to gather evidence. The court then found there is a dispute of facts as to whether the Board indeed discriminated against Vietnamese-owned salons.


File this under "stupid things that lawyers do to ruin their case." There is a reason why there is an elaborate set of rules of conduct for lawyers (especially government lawyers.) If you fail to follow them, you are opening yourself up to an individual liability.

No comments:

Post a Comment