The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 Presidents Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 Presidents Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Trial Academy Master Class 6.0
    • The Business Of Law
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

$1.2M Verdict Upheld Against Muslim Hotel Owner for Jewish Discrimination

Posted on January 30, 2015 by Larry Bodine
Hotel_Shangri-La_Santa_Monica (1)

Fundraising event shut down after hotel owner found out organization attendees were Jewish.

The Santa Monica, CA, Shangri-La Hotel and its Muslim owner are unable to evade more than $1.2 million in damages and $2 million in attorney’s fees for shutting down an event because the fundraisers were Jewish.

Tehmina Adaya is the owner and operator of the hotel, where a pool party was being held as a fundraiser for the Leadership Group of the Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces (FIDF).  Adaya, according to the court opinion, became “noticeably agitated” after reviewing one of FIDF’s pamphlets, and told the hotel’s former food and beverage director, Nathan Codrey, who coordinated the party, that she did not “want any [f—-ing] Jews in the pool,” according to court documents.

Unruh act violated

The California Unruh Civil Rights Act requires that business establishments provide equal accommodations and services to all persons regardless of religion, race, color, sex, ancestry, national origin, disability or medical condition.  According to the court opinion, 18 plaintiffs testified that they were “systematically denied hotel services based on their religion,” and were discriminated against by Adaya and Shangri-La by their refusal to “provide them services at the hotel pool because they were Jewish.”

Adaya ordered Shangri-La staff to shut down the pool party by locking the pool gates, requiring the group to remove their banners and guests to remove their FIDF T-shirts, and dismantling the roped event dividers.

Guests receive hostile treatment

Several plaintiffs observed and overheard Adaya’s agitated behavior and remarks, including telling a security guard to “get them out, get them out, get them out,” and asking a non-Jewish hotel guests if she wanted Adaya to “get these people off the lounge chairs” according to the court opinion.  Adaya and her husband stared down the remaining FIDF guests for “at least an hour to an hour and a half,” according to Codrey’s testimony in the court document.

Codrey repeated Adaya’s comments to the event organizer and also repeatedly apologized for Adaya’s actions, which he called “blatant anti-Semitism.”  Expert witness testimony was provided by Rabbi Wolpe, who testified that the hotel staff and owner’s conduct “could fairly be characterized as anti-Semitic.”

Owner’s Muslim background

Adaya and Shangri-La argued on appeal that the rabbi’s testimony and evidence of Adaya’s Pakistani Muslim background was prejudicial error. The appeal court disagreed, as testimony from Codrey indicated that Adaya repeated that the event was “embarrassing to her; that she is a Muslim, her parents or family are Muslims, and this is just absolutely wrong.”

The California court of appeals upheld the damages awarded by a jury to 11 plaintiffs after a 10-day trial and six days of jury deliberations, awarding $1.2 million in actual and statutory damages and $2 million in attorneys fees.

Adaya and Shangri-La argued many issues on appeal, which were denied by the court, including a lack of sufficiency of evidence proving their cessation of the event was not motivated by discrimination, but instead on the basis of “valid policies and practices” that “never existed in writing, and appeared to be applied at the whims of Adaya.”

Adaya also asserted her statements made to Codrey were inadmissible hearsay and the Rabbi’s expert witness testimony, including her religious background, were improperly admitted as evidence.  The appeal court denied these assertions.

Court upholds most of jury decisions

The court reversed the $405,000 punitive damage award for the intentional infliction of emotion distress, as it was duplicative of the statutory damages awarded under the Unruh act, which the court confirmed were punitive in nature.

The court also remanded the attorney fees award associated with the event promoter’s claims to the trial court for recalculation, however the attorney fees for the individual plaintiffs discriminated against were affirmed.  The plaintiffs were awarded damages ranging from $26,000 to $180,000, totaling to nearly $1.2 Million.

The case is Paletz v. Adaya, California Court of Appeal Case No. B247184, 2014 WL 7402324, at *1 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 29, 2014).

Posted in Blog, Civil Rights

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Total Settlement in Surfside Condo Collapse Tops $1 Billion

Total Settlement in Surfside Condo Collapse Tops $1 Billion

The proposed settlement reached nearly a year after the catastrophic Surfside building collapse along the South Flo[Read More...]
UCLA Will Pay Nearly $700 Million in Abuse Lawsuits

UCLA Will Pay Nearly $700 Million in Abuse Lawsuits

The University of California system announced Tuesday it will pay nearly $375 million to more than 300 women who said they we[Read More...]
Things to Consider When You Sue an Insurance Provider

Things to Consider When You Sue an Insurance Provider

We are all too acquainted with insurance coverage in our everyday lives. According to Investopedia, everyone should have[Read More...]
The Rochester Diocese Offers a $147 Million Settlement to Sex Abuse Survivors

The Rochester Diocese Offers a $147 Million Settlement to Sex Abuse Survivors

The Rochester Catholic Diocese is offering a $147 million settlement to sex abuse survivors. This offer comes as a federal ba[Read More...]
Jury Awards $77.5 Million to an Army Veteran in a 3M Earplug Case

Jury Awards $77.5 Million to an Army Veteran in a 3M Earplug Case

A jury in Pensacola, Fla., federal court on Friday ordered 3M to pay $77.5 million to a U.S. Army veteran who said he suffe[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.