AVI Foodsystems lawsuits over the past two decades include a federal disability discrimination settlement with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a $1.5 million class action settlement over unpaid overtime, two probable-cause findings from the Indiana Civil Rights Commission, several individual employment suits in New York and Alabama, an Ohio personal-injury appeal, and an ongoing 2026 investigation into whether the company gave adequate WARN Act notice before laying off nearly 300 workers in Philadelphia.
The 2009 EEOC Disability Discrimination Settlement
The largest federal enforcement action against AVI came in 2009, when the EEOC sued the company in the Southern District of Ohio. The agency alleged AVI kept a blanket rule requiring employees with disabilities to produce a “full-duty, no-restriction” medical release before returning to work, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Workers who could do their jobs with certain physical restrictions, the EEOC said, should not have had to clear that bar.1EEOC. AVI Foodsystems To Pay More Than $90,000 and Offer Jobs To Settle Disability Bias Lawsuit
The policy affected more than 80 employees across Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Kentucky, and West Virginia. AVI settled on July 29, 2009, through a consent decree agreeing to pay more than $90,000, offer jobs to the workers named in the decree, make additional payments to those not offered positions, and train its managers on ADA compliance.1EEOC. AVI Foodsystems To Pay More Than $90,000 and Offer Jobs To Settle Disability Bias Lawsuit
The $1.5 Million Overtime Class Action
In January 2017, former employees Tobias Mooneyham and Derek Sleve filed a class action in the Northern District of Ohio, accusing AVI of denying overtime pay to supervisors. The suit alleged the company classified Route Supervisors and CSA Supervisors as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act even though their actual work—driving vehicles, carrying merchandise, and stocking vending machines—mirrored that of the non-exempt Route Drivers and CSAs beneath them.2Top Class Actions. Ohio AVI Foodsystems Overtime Wages Class Action Settlement
The plaintiffs said the routes were “nearly impossible to complete in less than 40 hours per week” and that they typically worked around 55 hours weekly without an overtime premium.3Complaint, Mooneyham v. AVI Food Systems Inc. Mooneyham et al. v. AVI Food Systems Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-103
AVI denied wrongdoing but agreed to a $1.5 million settlement. The class covered employees who worked in those supervisor roles in Ohio between January 13, 2015, and December 7, 2017, plus anyone who had already opted in. Payouts were tied to each worker’s qualifying weeks. Judge Donald C. Nugent granted preliminary approval on January 26, 2018, and final approval on May 9, 2018.2Top Class Actions. Ohio AVI Foodsystems Overtime Wages Class Action Settlement
Indiana Civil Rights Commission Probable-Cause Findings
The Indiana Civil Rights Commission has issued probable-cause findings against AVI in at least two disability discrimination cases, each involving an employee who said the company ignored medical restrictions and then fired them.
One complainant, a cashier hired in March 2014, had a condition that prevented her from stooping, bending, twisting, or lifting more than 10 pounds. She said that despite an accommodation agreement, AVI moved her to a dishwasher role requiring her to lift pans over 20 pounds, and terminated her after she went to human resources. The ICRC found probable cause and noted that AVI submitted no rebuttal during the investigation.4Indiana Civil Rights Commission. Probable Cause Findings Issued Against AVI Foodsystems
The second complainant, a delivery driver hired around March 2012, had a condition limiting him to lifting no more than 20 pounds. He alleged AVI fired him after he refused tasks outside his restrictions, never engaged in the interactive accommodation process, and treated similarly situated employees of different races and genders more favorably. The ICRC again found probable cause and set the matter for a public hearing before an administrative law judge.5Indiana Civil Rights Commission. AVI Foodsystems Charged With Disability Discrimination
The 2026 Philadelphia Layoffs and WARN Act Investigation
In early 2026, AVI closed a Philadelphia facility, laying off 297 employees at locations on Spruce Street and Convention Avenue that were tied to large institutional food service accounts. The company filed a WARN notice with the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, and the layoffs took effect on February 1, 2026. AVI did not publicly state a reason for the closure.6FreightWaves. Layoffs, Bankruptcies Batter U.S. Logistics and Manufacturing at Start of 2026 A separate WARN notice filed in May 2026 disclosed another 45 layoffs at an Alfred, New York facility effective May 31, 2026, bringing the two notices to 342 workers combined.7WARN Tracker. AVI Foodsystems WARN Notices
The federal WARN Act generally requires employers to give 60 days’ written notice before a mass layoff or plant closing. Whether AVI met that deadline for the Philadelphia closure is the subject of an ongoing investigation by a plaintiff-side law firm, which has said affected employees could be entitled to 60 days of back pay and benefits if the company fell short of its notice obligations. As of mid-2026, no lawsuit had been filed on that theory.
Other Employment and Civil Cases
Several individual cases have moved through state and federal courts:
- Castillo v. AVI Foodsystems (S.D.N.Y., 2024): Bianca Castillo, appearing without an attorney, sued AVI under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Judge Kenneth M. Karas issued an opinion and order in July 2025, though the public record does not detail a final resolution.8Leagle. Castillo v. AVI Foodsystems, Inc.
- Dauswell v. AVI Foodsystems (S.D.N.Y., 2025): An employment discrimination suit filed in New York state court and removed to federal court in March 2025. The type of discrimination is not disclosed on the docket. The parties reported a settlement, Judge Jessica G.L. Clarke dismissed the case in August 2025, and by January 2026 the court declined to retain further jurisdiction.9PACER Monitor. Dauswell v. AVI Foodsystems, Inc.
- Brown v. AVI Food Systems (Alabama, 2024–2026): Valerie Brown sued AVI in Montgomery Circuit Court. The underlying claims are not publicly available. After Brown lost at trial, the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed in February 2026 and denied her rehearing application in April 2026.10CaseMine. Valerie Brown v. Avi Food Systems, Inc.
- Williams v. AVI Food Systems (Ohio, 2020): A personal-injury case rather than an employment matter. Steve Williams alleged he was struck by an AVI box truck driven by employee David Samay in Brook Park, Ohio, in January 2017. The trial court granted AVI summary judgment, but the Eighth District Court of Appeals reversed in October 2020, finding that factual disputes about driver negligence and the pedestrian’s visibility had to go to a jury.11Supreme Court of Ohio. Williams v. AVI Food Sys., Inc., 2020-Ohio-5001