International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund v. Lasalle Glass & Mirror Co. , 267 F.R.D. 430 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    INTERNATIONAL PAINTERS AND
    ALLIED TRADES INDUSTRY PENSION
    FUND,
    and
    GARY J. MEYERS, in his official capacity
    as a fiduciary,                                           Civil Action No. 09-1426 (CKK)
    Plaintiffs,
    v.
    LASALLE GLASS & MIRROR CO., d/b/a/
    LaSalle Glass & Mirror, d/b/a La Salle Glass
    & Mirror Co.,
    Defendant.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    (April 19, 2010)
    This action is brought by Plaintiffs International Painters and Allied Trades Industry
    Pension Fund (the “Fund”) and Gary J. Meyers, a fiduciary on behalf of the Fund (collectively,
    “Plaintiffs”) against Defendant LaSalle Glass & Mirror Company for legal and equitable relief
    under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), as amended by the
    Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980, 
    29 U.S.C. § 1145
    . Plaintiffs seek to
    recover unpaid contributions, liquidated damages, interest, late fees as well as attorneys’ fees and
    costs incurred by the Fund pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. §§ 1132
    (g)(2)(A)-(D) and a collective
    bargaining agreement entered into under 
    29 U.S.C. § 185
    . Although properly and timely served,
    Defendant have failed to respond to Plaintiffs’ lawsuit, and the Clerk of the Court, upon request
    by Plaintiffs, has since entered default against Defendant. See Clerk’s Entry of Default, Docket
    No. [17]. Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ [18] Motion for Judgment by Default. Having
    thoroughly considered the Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs’ submissions and attachments thereto,
    the applicable case law, statutory authority, and the record of the case as a whole, the Court shall
    GRANT Plaintiffs’ [18] Motion for Judgment by Default, for the reasons stated below.
    I. BACKGROUND
    The Fund is a trust fund established under 
    29 U.S.C. § 186
    (c)(5), and its Trustees are
    fiduciaries and plan administrators for the International Painters and Allied Trades Industry
    Pension Plan (“Pension Plan”) and International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Annuity
    Plan (“Annuity Plan”) (collectively, with the Fund, the “ERISA Funds”). Am. Compl. ¶ 4. Both
    the Pension Plan and the Annuity Plan are multiemployer employee benefit pension plans. 
    Id. ¶¶ 5-6
    . Plaintiff Meyers is a fiduciary of the ERISA Funds with respect to the collection of
    contributions due. 
    Id. ¶ 7
    .
    Plaintiffs filed the initial Complaint in the above-captioned matter on July 29, 2009.
    Defendant failed to answer or otherwise respond to the original Complaint, and the Clerk of the
    Court entered default against Defendant on October 6, 2009. See Clerk’s Entry of Default,
    Docket No. [5]. Plaintiffs thereafter filed a Motion for Judgment by Default. See Docket No.
    [7]. However, before the Court had the opportunity to rule on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judgment by
    Default, Plaintiffs voluntarily withdrew the motion and simultaneously moved to vacate the
    Clerk’s Entry of Default. See Docket Nos. [8] & [9]. The Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion and
    vacated the Entry of Default that had been previously entered against Defendant. See 2/24/10
    Min. Order.
    Plaintiffs, with leave of the Court, subsequently filed an Amended Complaint on March
    2
    10, 2010. See Am. Compl., Docket No. [13]. As set forth therein, Plaintiffs assert that
    Defendant has entered into a collective bargaining agreement (“Labor Agreement”) with the one
    or more local labor unions or district councils affiliated with the International Union of Painters
    and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO, CLC (collectively, the “Union”). 
    Id.
     ¶ 12 & Ex. 1 (Labor
    Agreement). Plaintiffs also allege that Defendant has agreed to abide by an Agreement and
    Declaration of Trust of the Fund (“Trust Agreement”) as well as plan documents for the ERISA
    Funds. 
    Id.
     ¶ 13 & Ex. 2 (Trust Agreement), Ex. 3 (copy of plan document for the Pension Plan).
    Under the Labor Agreement, the Trust Agreement, and the plan documents for the ERISA Funds,
    Defendant agreed to: make certain contributions to the ERISA Funds based on its employees’
    work; file monthly remittance reports with the ERISA Funds detailing all employees’ work for
    which contributions were required; produce records necessary to permit the ERISA Funds to
    conduct an audit; and pay certain costs associated with litigation if Defendant failed to comply
    with its obligations. 
    Id. ¶ 14
    . Plaintiffs allege that Defendant has failed to make the required
    monthly payments through January 2010 and that Defendant has otherwise failed to make
    contributions required under the agreements. 
    Id. ¶¶ 17-38
    .
    Pursuant to the terms of those agreements, Plaintiffs assert that they are therefore entitled
    to: a monetary award for violation of 
    29 U.S.C. § 1145
     in the amount of the unpaid contributions
    to the ERISA Funds, liquidated damages, interest on the unpaid contributions and late fees as
    well as costs, audit expenses, and attorneys’ fees (Count I); a monetary award for breach of the
    Labor Agreement (and its incorporated agreements) in the amount of unpaid contributions owed,
    including liquidated damages, late fees, interest, costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees (Count II);
    an audit of Defendant’s records to determine the amounts owed (Count III); after an audit, a
    3
    monetary award for violation of 
    29 U.S.C. § 1145
     in the amount of the contributions found due
    and owing by the audit, together with late charges, interest, liquidated damages, costs, and fees
    (Count IV); a monetary award for breach of the Labor Agreement (and its incorporated
    agreements) for unpaid funds found due and owing by the audit (Count V); and a permanent
    injunction enjoining Defendant from further violations of the parties’ agreements and, in
    particular, from violating requirements under those agreements providing for the timely filing of
    remittance reports and timely payment of contributions to the ERISA Funds (Count VI). 
    Id. ¶¶ 17-38
    .
    Plaintiffs, in their instant motion, have moved for default judgment seeking: (1) a
    judgment for $42,930.15 in unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, late fees, and
    attorneys’ fees and costs; (2) an order declaring that the judgment shall continue to bear interest
    until the date of actual payment; (3) an order requiring Defendant to provide all outstanding
    remittance reports with all required information to the Fund and to submit to an audit of its wage,
    payroll, and personnel records within twenty days of entry of judgment; and (4) an order
    enjoining Defendant to submit to an audit of its wage, payroll, and personnel records. See Pl.’s
    Proposed Order.1
    1
    Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judgment by Default and its attached Proposed Order are silent as
    to Counts IV and V of the Amended Complaint, which seek monetary damages after conclusion
    of the requested audit. In addition, the Court notes that Plaintiffs have not requested that the
    Court retain jurisdiction over this matter in order to permit additional or supplement judgments
    upon conclusion of the audit; to the contrary, Plaintiffs’ Proposed Order requests only that the
    Court make clear that any final “judgment shall not preclude collection of any additional
    delinquency reported in new forms or discovered in the audit.” See Proposed Order ¶ 7(c).
    Accordingly, the Court understands that Plaintiffs are not seeking default judgment as to Counts
    IV and V of the Amended Complaint and shall therefore DISMISS Counts IV and V WITHOUT
    PREJUDICE.
    4
    Defendant was served with the Amended Complaint on March 10, 2010. See Cert. of
    Service, Docket No. [14]. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), Defendant was
    required to file an answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint by no later than
    March 24, 2010. Defendant failed to do so, however, and, at Plaintiffs’ request, the Clerk of the
    Court once again entered default against Defendant on March 29, 2010. See Clerk’s Entry of
    Default, Docket No. [17]. On April 6, 2010, Plaintiffs filed the now-pending Motion for
    Judgment by Default. See Pl.’s Mot. for Def. J., Docket No. [18]. As of the date of this
    Memorandum Opinion, Defendant has not entered an appearance nor filed any pleadings in this
    case.
    II. LEGAL STANDARD
    Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) provides that the clerk of the court must enter a
    party’s default “[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has
    failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise.” FED . R.
    CIV . P. 55(a). After a default has been entered by the clerk of the court, a court may enter a
    default judgment pursuant to Rule 55(b). FED . R. CIV . P. 55(b). “The determination of whether
    default judgment is appropriate is committed to the discretion of the trial court.” Int’l Painters &
    Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund v. Auxier Drywall, LLC, 
    531 F. Supp. 2d 56
    , 57 (D.D.C.
    2008) (citing Jackson v. Beech, 
    636 F.2d 831
    , 836 (D.C. Cir. 1980)). Upon entry of default by
    the clerk of the court, the “defaulting defendant is deemed to admit every well-pleaded allegation
    in the complaint.” Int’l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund v. R.W. Armine Drywall
    Co., Inc., 
    239 F. Supp. 2d 26
    , 30 (D.D.C. 2002) (internal citation omitted). “Although the
    default establishes a defendant’s liability, the court is required to make an independent
    5
    determination of the sum to be awarded unless the amount of damages is certain.” 
    Id.
     (citing
    Adkins v. Teseo, 
    180 F. Supp. 2d 15
    , 17 (D.D.C. 2001)). Accordingly, when moving for a default
    judgment, the plaintiff must prove its entitlement to the amount of monetary damages requested.
    
    Id.
     “In ruling on such a motion, the court may rely on detailed affidavits or documentary
    evidence to determine the appropriate sum for the default judgment.” 
    Id.
    III. DISCUSSION
    Where, as here, there is a complete “absence of any request to set aside the default or
    suggestion by the defendant that it has a meritorious defense, it is clear that the standard for
    default judgment has been satisfied.” Auxier Drywall, LLC, 
    531 F. Supp. 2d at 57
     (internal
    quotation marks omitted). The Clerk of the Court entered Defendant’s default, and the factual
    allegations in the Amended Complaint are therefore taken as true. See R.W. Armine Drywall Co.,
    Inc., 
    239 F. Supp. 2d at 30
    . The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint sufficiently
    alleges facts to support their claims. Plaintiffs are thus entitled to default judgment as to
    Defendant’s liability for its failure to timely pay contributions to the ERISA Funds and to timely
    submit the remittance reports and other documentation, as required under the terms of Labor
    Agreement, the Trust Agreement, the plan documents for the ERISA Funds. Plaintiffs seek both
    monetary and injunctive relief based upon Defendant’s failure to timely pay the required
    contributions and to timely submit the required documents to the Fund. The Court considers
    each request in turn below.
    A.      Monetary Damages
    Although the default establishes a defendant’s liability, the Court must make an
    independent determination of the sum to be awarded in the judgment unless the amount of
    6
    damages is certain. Adkins, 
    180 F. Supp. 2d at 17
    . Under ection 515 of ERISA, “[e]very
    employer who is obligated to make contributions to a multiemployer plan under the terms of the
    plan or under the terms of a collectively bargained agreement shall . . . make such contributions
    in accordance with the terms and conditions of such plan or such agreement.” 
    29 U.S.C. § 1145
    .
    When an employer fails to make such contributions, ERISA provides that the fiduciary for a plan
    may bring an action and obtain a mandatory award for the plan consisting of:
    (A) the unpaid contributions,
    (B) interest on the unpaid contributions,
    (C) an amount equal to the greater of –
    (i) interest on the unpaid contributions; or
    (ii) liquidated damages provided for under the plan in an amount not in
    excess of 20 percent (or such higher percentage as may be permitted under
    Federal or State law) of the amount determined by the Court under
    Subparagraph (a),
    (D) reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of the action, to be paid by the defendant,
    and
    (E) such other legal or equitable relief as the court deems appropriate.
    
    Id.
     § 1132(g)(2). Interest is calculated using the rate provided under the plan, or, if none, the rate
    prescribed by 
    26 U.S.C. § 6621
    . 
    Id.
     In addition to the remedies available under ERISA, a
    benefit trust fund may, as a third-party beneficiary, recover for breach of a collective bargaining
    agreement under 
    29 U.S.C. § 185
    (a). See Hudson County Carpenters Union Local Union No. 6.
    v. V.S.R. Constr. Corp., 
    127 F. Supp. 2d 565
    , 568 (D.N.J. 2000) (“It is well-established that the
    failure to make contributions to a union trust fund as required by a collective bargaining
    agreement constitutes a violation of ERISA § 515 and a violation of [
    29 U.S.C. § 185
    ].”); see
    7
    also Bugher v. Feightner, 
    722 F.2d 1356
    , 1357-60 (7th Cir. 1983) (explaining that ERISA
    remedies are intended to supplement rather than supersede rights existing under 
    29 U.S.C. § 185
    (a)).
    Plaintiffs have provided the Court with affidavits to support a damages award of
    $42,930.15. As set forth in the Declaration of Thomas Montemore, Assistant to the Fund
    Administrator for the Fund, Plaintiffs have calculated that Defendant owes $20,136.20 in unpaid
    contributions for September 2009 and for the period of November 2009 through January 2010.
    See Pls.’ Mot. for J. by Default, Ex. 1 (Decl. of Thomas Montemore) ¶ 9(a). Because of
    Defendant’s failure to submit both contributions and remittance reports to the Fund, this amount
    is an estimate of the unpaid contributions due each of the months at issue based on an average of
    the three previous months for which reports were submitted multiplied by four months. See 
    id.
    The Court approves this calculation as a reasonable estimate of the unpaid contributions. Cf.
    Int’l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. v. Advanced Pro Painting Servs., __ F. Supp. 2d __, Civ.
    Act. No. 09-313, 
    2010 WL 1069161
    , * 4 (D.D.C. Mar. 24, 2010) (accepting plaintiffs estimate of
    damages based on an average of unpaid contributions reported in previous two months); Flynn v.
    Extreme Granite, Inc., 
    671 F. Supp. 2d 157
    , 162 (D.D.C. 2009) (“In light of the defendant’s
    failure to provide periodic reports or allow the plaintiffs access to the defendant’s books and
    records, the court accepts the plaintiffs’ estimation of delinquent contributions as accurate as
    possible under the circumstances.”); R.W. Armine Drywall Co., Inc., 
    239 F. Supp. 2d at 31-32
    (granting request for damages based in part on estimates of money owed based on prior
    remittance reports).
    In addition, Plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated that Defendant owes interest on the
    8
    unpaid amounts through February 28, 2010, in the amount of $520.14, based on the total amount
    of unpaid contributions indicated above and the fluctuating IRS interest rate as provided in
    section 10 of the Pension Plan, which adopts the ERISA standard. Montemore Decl. ¶ 9(b); see
    also Am. Compl., Ex. 3 (copy of plan document for the Pension Plan) § 10.12(b). Plaintiffs have
    also calculated that they are entitled to liquidated damages as well in the amount of twenty
    percent of the total unpaid contributions, as provided for both in 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2) and in
    section 10 of the Pension Plan, which amount equals $9,624.31. Montemore Decl. ¶ 9(c); see
    also Am. Compl., Ex. 3 (copy of plan document for the Pension Plan) § 10.12(b). Additionally,
    pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2) and section 10.12 of the plan documents, which both permit
    an award of “other legal or equitable relief the Court deems appropriate,” Plaintiffs seek, and the
    Court finds that they are entitled to, an award of late charges in the amount of $84.67 for the
    period of March 2009 based on Defendant’s late payment of certain contributions that were paid
    prior to litigation. Montemore Decl. ¶ 9(d); see also Am. Compl., Ex. 3 (copy of plan document
    for the Pension Plan) § 10.12(b).
    Finally, Plaintiffs request an award of attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of
    $12,563.03. See Pls.’ Mot. for J. by Default, Ex. 5 (Decl. of Dawn M. Costa) ¶ 2. Plaintiffs have
    attached supporting documentation showing that they have incurred $11,513.00 in attorneys’ fees
    and $1,050.03 in costs in litigating this action. Id., Ex. 6 (time and expense detail). This is based
    on 53.90 hours of attorney and paralegal time at rates of $220 per hour and $70 per hour,
    respectively, plus expenses for the filing fee, photocopies, and various other items. See generally
    id. Plaintiffs have provided documentation showing that these rates are reasonable for the
    services rendered. Accordingly, the Court shall award the attorneys’ fees and costs requested.
    9
    Thus, the total money judgment for Plaintiffs shall be $42,930.15.
    B.      Injunctive Relief
    Plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief in the form of an order directing Defendant to
    complete and provide to the Fund any and all outstanding remittance reports with supporting
    information and to submit to an audit of its wage, payroll, and personnel records. As indicated
    previously, under the terms of the relevant agreements, Defendant is obligated to submit monthly
    remittance reports and corresponding fringe benefit contributions to the Fund. Montemore Decl.
    ¶ 8; see also Am. Compl., Ex. 2 (Trust Agreement), Art. VI, § 5. In addition, the relevant
    agreements obligate Defendant to produce all of its payroll books and records and any other
    financial records needed by the Fund’s auditors to conduct a contribution compliance audit to
    determine the precise amount owed to the ERISA Funds. Montemore Decl. ¶¶ 11-12; see also
    Am. Compl., Ex. 1 (Labor Agreement), Art. 20, § 3.3; id., Ex. 2 (Trust Agreement), Art. VI, § 6.
    Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they are entitled to the
    requested injunctive relief under the terms of the relevant agreements. The Court shall therefore
    order Defendant to complete and submit to the Fund, within twenty days of the entry of the
    Court’s Order, any and all outstanding remittance reports with all required information. In
    addition, the Court shall order Defendant to submit to an audit of its wage, payroll, and personnel
    records within twenty days of the date of the entry of the Court’s Order. Defendant shall bear the
    costs of any such audit.
    IV. CONCLUSION
    For the reasons set forth above, the Court shall GRANT Plaintiffs’ [18] Motion for
    Judgment by Default. The Court shall award damages in the amount of $42,930.15 as well as
    10
    order that Defendant provide the Fund with all outstanding remittances and submit to an audit of
    its records. An appropriate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
    Date: April 19, 2010
    /s/
    COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY
    United States District Judge
    11