Legal File: Dealership Settles Veteran’s Claim & Hyundai Immigration Case  

Two very different disputes have unfolded this month, but both tell a similar story: when the law collides with the workplace, the consequences can ripple far beyond the individuals involved. One case played out quietly in a Maryland federal courtroom, ending with a $30,000 settlement and policy changes at a local dealership. The other made global headlines, sparking diplomatic tensions between Washington and Seoul after hundreds of Korean workers were swept up in a U.S. immigration raid. Together, they illustrate how companies, whether small or multinational, can find themselves in legal jeopardy when they misstep on employee rights or federal enforcement.

The Maryland case centered on Criswell Chevrolet-GMC of Gaithersburg, part of Criswell Auto. According to a  lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the dealership denied an Iraq War veteran’s request to bring his service dog to work. The employee, Daniel Pulsipher, had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, and the dog was intended to help him manage his condition while performing his job in the parts department. The complaint alleged that Pulsipher’s supervisor ignored the request and that human resources later rejected it outright, offering no alternative accommodations. Without the support he needed, Pulsipher’s work began to suffer and he ultimately felt compelled to leave his position.

The EEOC said those actions violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to workers with disabilities unless doing so would cause undue hardship. Rather than face trial, Criswell agreed to pay Pulsipher $30,000 and also committed to training managers on ADA compliance and submitting reports to federal officials. In announcing the deal, EEOC officials stressed that the case serves as a warning to other employers: denying or ignoring requests from disabled workers can result in costly legal battles. Criswell has since revised its policies to prevent similar disputes. The dealership’s management did not respond to requests for comment.

While that case unfolded in a single workplace, the other involves an entire international workforce. Earlier this month, U.S. authorities launched a massive immigration raid at a Hyundai-LG battery plant under construction in Georgia, detaining nearly 475 foreign workers. More than 300 of them were South Korean nationals, flown in to provide specialist expertise for the sprawling $7.6 billion complex designed to produce battery-powered vehicles. Instead of building out the plant, the workers found themselves in handcuffs and shackles, transported by federal agents and facing an uncertain future.

Images of the raid circulated widely in South Korea, where they triggered outrage. Families feared their relatives might be deported, and officials worried the episode could cast a shadow over the country’s economic ties with the United States. South Korea’s government quickly intervened, dispatching negotiators to Washington and elevating the issue to the highest levels. Within a week, the workers were put on a chartered plane home, greeted at Incheon airport by tearful family members and even the presidential chief of staff, who called the incident an affront to “innocent people of Korea.”

The raid also highlighted a long-running problem: the difficulty of obtaining U.S. visas for foreign specialists who are essential to large industrial projects. In recent years, companies have sometimes operated in legal gray areas when bringing in temporary workers. South Korea is now pushing for the creation of a special visa category to prevent such incidents in the future, and officials in Washington have signaled they are open to discussions. But the immediate fallout is real. Hyundai has already warned that the factory will be delayed by two to three months, potentially complicating production schedules for new battery-powered models.

For the workers themselves, the experience was jarring. One engineer said the moment handcuffs were applied, he realized “this is not going to be a simple transport.” Another questioned whether anyone would be willing to return to the U.S. under such conditions. The raid even sparked anti-American sentiment at the airport, where one protester unfurled a poster depicting President Donald Trump in a uniform with the initials of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, holding a bag of money and a gun. Police quickly removed him, but the image reflected how raw emotions remain.

Both cases—one involving a single veteran in Maryland, the other hundreds of engineers in Georgia—underscore how quickly workplace issues can escalate into legal or diplomatic crises. For Criswell Chevrolet, failing to accommodate a disabled worker led to a settlement and public scrutiny. For Hyundai and LG, visa missteps resulted in international headlines, delays on a multi-billion-dollar project, and questions about whether South Korea will hesitate before committing further investment in U.S. manufacturing.

The message is clear: when it comes to labor laws, disability protections, and immigration enforcement, the stakes are high. Companies that neglect to follow the rules—or underestimate the consequences—risk not just lawsuits and fines, but reputational damage, strained partnerships, and delays that ripple across industries. In today’s environment, legal compliance is not just a box to check. It’s a business necessity, and as these cases show, the price of getting it wrong can be much higher than expected.