Boland v. Sovereign Tile, Inc. ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    ____________________________________
    )
    JAMES BOLAND, et al.,                )
    )
    Plaintiffs,        )
    )
    v.                       ) Civil Action No. 10-2325 (ESH)
    )
    SOVEREIGN TILE, INC.,                )
    )
    Defendant.         )
    ____________________________________ )
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for entry of default judgment. This case is an
    action 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
    . Defendant was served with the complaint on February 4, 2011, but has failed to
    answer or otherwise defend this action. The Clerk of Court entered default on April 7, 2011.
    Pursuant to the Court’s April 14, 2011 Order, plaintiffs have moved for entry of default
    judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2).1/
    The determination of whether default judgment is appropriate is committed to the
    discretion of the trial court. Jackson v. Beech, 
    636 F.2d 831
    , 836 (D.C. Cir. 1980). For default
    judgment, defendant must be considered a “totally unresponsive” party and its default plainly
    willful, reflected by its failure to respond to the summons and complaint, the entry of default, or
    the motion for default judgment. Gutierrez v. Berg Contracting Inc., No. 99-3044, 
    2000 WL 1
    /
    The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (e)(1), and
    venue is proper under 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (e)(2). The Court has jurisdiction over defendant
    pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (e)(2) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(1)(C).
    331721, *1 (D.D.C. March 20, 2000) (citing Jackson, 
    636 F.2d at 836
    ). Given “the 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. 
    Id.
    Although the default establishes a defendant’s liability, the Court makes an independent
    determination of the sum to be awarded in the judgment unless the amount of damages is certain.
    Adkins v. Teseo, 
    180 F. Supp. 2d 15
    , 17 (D.D.C. 2001). Pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2), the
    Court shall award plaintiffs: (A) the unpaid contributions; (B) interest on the unpaid
    contributions; (C) liquidated damages in an amount equal to the greater of (i) interest on the
    unpaid contributions, or (ii) 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. The Court may rely on detailed
    affidavits or documentary evidence to determine the appropriate sum for default judgment.
    Flynn v. Mastro Masonry Contractors, 
    237 F. Supp. 2d 66
    , 69 (D.D.C. 2002).
    Plaintiffs have filed the declarations of David F. Stupar, Executive Director of the
    Bricklayers & Trowel Trades International Pension Fund (“the Fund”) and an authorized
    representative to effect collections on behalf of the International Masonry Institute (“IMI”), and
    Charles V. Mehler, Esq., in support of the motion for default judgment. Based on the
    declarations, the Court finds that plaintiffs have established damages in the amounts of
    $35,801.04 in unpaid contributions to the Fund and IMI for work performed in the jurisdiction of
    Local 67 IL during the time period December 2007 through November 2009, pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2)(A); $12,529.20 in interest on those unpaid contributions, pursuant to 29
    
    2 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2)(B); and $12,259.20 in additional interest pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2)(C)(i). In addition, plaintiffs are entitled to attorney’s fees in the amount of $9.746.50
    and costs in the amount of $527.00, pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2)(D).
    Therefore, pursuant to 
    29 U.S.C. § 1132
    (g)(2), judgment will be entered for plaintiffs in
    the amount of $71,132.94. A separate Order of judgment will accompany this opinion.
    /s/
    ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE
    United States District Judge
    Date: May 2, 2011
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2010-2325

Judges: Judge Ellen S. Huvelle

Filed Date: 5/2/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014