McDowell et al v. Price et al

Filing 424

ORDER DENYING pltfs' 421 Appeal of Magistrate Judge's Order. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 9/19/11. (vjt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
KENNITH McDOWELL, ROBERT
MAULDING, LUTHER STRIPLING,
RUDY KYLE, FRED DOLLAR, JAMES
JOSLIN, JAMES MILNER, JOE ELLIS,
DAVID ELLIS, DANIEL STRIPLING, and
JANET STRIPLING,
Plaintiffs,
vs.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ELBERT PRICE, individually and as Trustee *
for these plans: Bud Price’s Excavating
*
Service Inc. Profit-Sharing Plan, Bud Price’s *
Excavating Service, Inc. Retirement Plan,
*
Price’s Utility Contractors, Inc. Retirement
*
Plan and for six unnamed plans; MARY
*
RUTH PRICE, individually and as Trustee
*
for these plans: Bud Price’s Excavating
*
Service, Inc. Profit-Sharing Plan, Bud Price’s *
Excavating Service, Inc. Retirement Plan,
*
Price’s Utility Contractors, Inc. Retirement
*
Plan and for six unnamed plans (Plans A-F); *
Bud Price’s Excavating Service, Inc.
*
Profit-Sharing Plan; Price’s Utility Contractors, *
Inc. Retirement Plan; Bud Price’s Excavating *
Service, Inc. Retirement Plan; six unnamed
*
plans (Plans A-F); Price’s Utility Contractors, *
Inc. as plan administrator for Price’s Utility
*
Contractor’s Inc., Retirement Plan and up to
*
six unnamed plans; Bud Price’s Excavating
*
Service, Inc. as plan administrator of Bud
*
Price’s Excavating Service, Inc. Profit*
Sharing Plan, Bud Price’s Excavating Service, *
Inc. Retirement Plan, and up to six unnamed *
plans (A-F),
*
Defendants.
*

No. 4:08-cv-03979-SWW-HDY

ORDER
Plaintiffs Kennith McDowell, Robert Maulding, Luther Stripling, Rudy Kyle, Fred
Dollar, James Joslin, James Milner, Joe Ellis, David Ellis, Daniel Stripling, and Janet Stripling,

former employees or beneficiaries of former employees of defendants Bud Price’s Excavating
Service, Inc. and Price’s Utility Contractors, Inc., bring this action pursuant to the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., to have their
benefits under certain profit sharing plans and defined benefit plans maintained by defendants
determined and paid. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge H. David Young for further
proceedings and recommendation.
Plaintiffs appeal [doc.#421] the Magistrate Judge’s September 1, 2011 Order [doc.#419]
denying their motion [doc.#389] to re-open discovery, denying their motion [doc.#401] for
sanctions, denying their motion [doc.#407] to remove the current trustees and plan
administrators for all three named defendant plans, denying their motion [doc.#409] requesting
permission to enter onto land allegedly purchased with plan monies and for subsequent
discovery if logging has occurred, and denying their motion [doc.#411] requesting entry of
satisfaction of judgment and imposition of statutory sanctions against James E. Turpin.1 The
Court has considered the arguments raised by plaintiffs and finds no basis for setting aside the
Magistrate Judge’s September 1, 2011 Order. Accordingly, the Court denies plaintiff’s appeal of
the Magistrate Judge’s Order.2
IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of September 2011.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

This is plaintiffs’ sixth appeal of an Order of the Magistrate Judge since March 2010. See document
entries 268, 293, 368, 382, and 394.
2

The Court notes that a hearing on the motions for summary judgment [doc.#’s 318, 320, and 330] is
scheduled for September 27, 2011.

2