PHILADELPHIA – After a finding of default, a Philadelphia social club accused of discriminating through its membership application process against prospective Black members has now requested that same default be set aside.
Raina Stewart first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on July 17 versus Glu Hospitality, LLC (doing business as “Vesper Dayclub”), Vesper Holdings, LLC, Derek Gibbons and Tim Lu. All parties are based in Philadelphia.
The Vesper Dayclub is a members-only establishment which restricts its use to those who have successfully submitted membership applications to the club. The establishment consists of an age 21-and-over pool, expansive physical premises and neighboring bar and restaurant.
“Defendants attempted to create a daily atmosphere in a Northern Liberties club setting that would mirror that of a Hollywood or Las Vegas beach party with an enticement of a minimal application fee, exclusivity, and a culture that its clientele would desire on a continual basis,” the suit said.
“Defendants intentionally discriminated against black (and African-American) prospective membership (in general) barring their membership almost entirely, with the exception of permitting very limited black membership due to some with relationships, being well-connected, and/or being higher-profile individuals.”
Stewart said membership applications at Vesper Dayclub are made exclusively upon examination of an applicant’s social media profiles, irrespective of any credit check, financial data, criminal background review or any other information search.
“Plaintiff is a dark-skinned, African-American female. Plaintiff is a very reputable, honest and educated individual. She is a college graduate, professional, and works at Jefferson University. Nothing in her character would warrant any type of denial of membership. Plaintiff submitted an on-line application for membership on June 28, 2019. Plaintiff’s online profile showed several pictures of her, which clearly evidenced her being a dark-skinned African-American female,” the suit stated.
“Plaintiff’s on-line application was submitted, she confirmed it was received, and she never heard back from defendants. She was never granted or accepted for membership; and instead, she was ignored and never received the courtesy of even a follow-up call, e-mail, or explanation for non-consideration (or in other words, rejection).”
Stewart said within the same general timeframe that she submitted her online application for membership, another prospective member named Mariam Dembele submitted her own online application. Dembele had numerous public photos on her social media evidencing she, like the plaintiff, is a Black female.
Also just like plaintiff, Dembele had her application ignored, she received no response, and was not granted admission or membership. The suit adds there was no character-based justification for Dembele’s rejection (through non-response). Dembele holds a bachelor’s degree in Journalism, and works as a professional in a reputable organization, the suit said.
“Within the same general timeframe of plaintiff’s application, two people whom plaintiff also knew, both of whom were Caucasian, both applied for membership to the Vesper Dayclub. They were Shannon Morton and Elizabeth Carpenter. They were both approved as new members within 24-48 hours (and of course received a response),” the suit stated.
“The experiences plaintiff had were demonstrative of systematic, intentional, and knowing racial discrimination against black and/or African prospective membership. The culture in which defendants aimed to create involved minimal if any black representation within the Vesper Dayclub.”
Stewart also pointed to online postings criticizing Vesper Dayclub’s alleged lack of racial diversity and explained that given the high level of diversity in the Philadelphia area, there exists a “tremendous statistical disparity” in the club’s membership participation.
“While Ms. Stewart feels hurt by such a vetting process, she hopes to shed light on these practices which can have a discriminatory impact upon people such as her,” plaintiff counsel Christine E. Burke said in a statement.
UPDATE
On Oct. 12, counsel for Stewart filed a request for a default judgment, as an answer to the case had not yet been filed by the defendants by the respective deadlines which began tolling after they were served.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Paul S. Diamond approved the entry of such a default judgment the following day. But after all parties agreed to mutually ask the Court to set aside the default judgment, counsel filed an official request for the default’s rescission for good cause on Oct. 19.
Defendant Lu maintained that the complaint was forwarded to the club’s insurance provider upon receipt in late August, and though it seemed the matter would initially be covered – however, delays relating to the investigation dragged out the insurer’s answer until Oct. 12, when Lu was informed the club would be denied insurance coverage in this case.
“Once denied coverage was confirmed on Oct. 12, 2020, we formally engaged with private counsel to investigate and respond to plaintiff’s claims,” Lu said in a submitted certification, asking for the default to be set aside.
For two counts of racial discrimination, the plaintiff is seeking a long list of reliefs:
• A temporary and/or permanent injunction enjoining the defendant from engaging in further racial discrimination by order, judgment and/or decree;
• The defendants are to compensate plaintiff for any all damages she has suffered, including but not related to her: (a) Loss of enjoyment; (b) Emotional distress; (c) Inability to make purchases and enjoy services; and (d) All other harms;
• Defendants are to be ordered to pay punitive damages (and other applicable penalty-related damages) individually and/or severally for their willful, knowing, and malicious discriminatory actions as outlined in this complaint (as will be further determined during case pendency);
• Defendants are to be ordered to permit participation of plaintiff and all other black and/or African-Americans on a fair, equitable, and objective basis through a non-discriminatory application process;
• Plaintiff is to be accorded other equitable and legal relief as the Court deems just, proper, and appropriate (including but not limited to damages for emotional distress / pain and suffering);
• Plaintiff is to be awarded the costs and expenses of this action and reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by applicable federal and state law; and
• Plaintiff is to be given a jury trial as demanded in the caption of this complaint.
The plaintiff is represented by Ari Risson Karpf and Christine E. Burke of Karpf Karpf & Cerutti, in Bensalem.
The defendants are represented by Barbara A. O’Connell of Sweeney & Sheehan, in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-03514
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com