Alaska Laborers Employers Retirement Trust et al v. Earth Stone, Inc.
Filing
24
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 12 Motion for Summary Judgment. The motion at docket 12 is GRANTED to the extent that defendant owes some amount of unpaid contributions to plaintiffs, together with associated sums to be calculated pursuant to applicable statutes, but otherwise DENIED. Signed by Judge John W. Sedwick on 5/10/16. (GMM, CHAMBERS STAFF)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF ALASKA
8
9
10
Alaska Laborers Employers
Retirement Trust, et al.,
11
12
Plaintiffs,
vs.
13
14
15
Earth Stone, Inc.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
3:15-cv-193 JWS
ORDER AND OPINION
[Re: Motion at docket 12]
16
I. MOTION PRESENTED
17
18
At docket 12 plaintiffs move for summary judgment. Defendant opposes at
19
docket 19, and plaintiffs reply at docket 23. Oral argument has not been requested and
20
would not assist the court.
21
II. DISCUSSION
22
23
24
In their motion and supporting papers, plaintiffs ask the court to rule that as a
matter of law defendant is liable for unpaid contributions due to plaintiffs as well as for
25
liquidated damages, interest, costs, and attorney’s fees. More specifically, they ask the
26
court to rule that they are entitled to judgment against defendant for $66,887.51 plus
27
attorney’s fees and costs. Plaintiffs rely on a payroll audit performed by
28
1
2
3
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP. In its opposition, def endant does not deny that it owes some
amount of money for unpaid contributions, but provides its owner’s affidavit which is
sufficient to create disputed issues of material fact with respect to the amount owed.
4
5
6
Plaintiffs concede this point in their reply.
Having reviewed the parties’ papers, the court concludes that plaintif fs are not
7
entitled as a matter of law to all the relief they request. The motion at docket 12 is
8
GRANTED to the extent that defendant owes some amount of unpaid contributions to
9
plaintiffs, together with associated sums to be calculated pursuant to applicable
10
statutes, but otherwise DENIED. Because resolution of the quantum owed appears to
11
12
be largely an accounting problem, the court strongly recommends that the parties settle
13
their dispute. In the court’s view, resolution of the amount owed by defendant could be
14
more efficiently resolved by mediation, negotiation, or the engagement of a mutually
15
agreeable independent accountant than by trial.
16
DATED this 10th day of May 2016.
17
18
19
20
/s/ JOHN W. SEDWICK
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?