Trustees of The National Automatic Sprinkler Industry Welfare Fund et al v. Romero et al

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM OPINION (c/m to H&M Mechanical, Pablo Romero d/b/a H&M Mechanical, and Pablo Romero 3/10/25 sat). Signed by Judge Deborah K. Chasanow on 3/10/2025. (sat, Chambers)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
TRUSTEES OF THE NATIONAL
AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER INDUSTRY
WELFARE FUND, et al.

:
:

v.

:

Civil Action No. DKC 24-1827

:
PABLO ROMERO d/b/a H&M
MECHANICAL, et al.

:
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Presently pending and ready for resolution in this case
brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974

(“ERISA”),

is

a

motion

for

default

judgment

filed

by

Plaintiffs Trustees of the National Automatic Sprinkler Industry
Welfare Fund, Trustees of the National Automatic Sprinkler Local
669 UA Education Fund, Trustees of the National Automatic Sprinkler
Industry

Pension

Fund,

Trustees

of

the

Sprinkler

Industry

Supplemental Pension Fund, Trustees of the International Training
Fund, and Road Sprinkler Fitters Local Union 669 Work Assessments,
Extended Benefit Fund and Industry Advancement Fund (together, the
“Trustees” of the “NASI Funds”). (ECF No. 15).

For the following

reasons, the motion will be granted.
I.

Background
The Trustees are fiduciaries of the NASI funds.

The NASI

funds are employee benefit plans as defined in Section 3(3) of
ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(3).

They are established and maintained

according

to

the

provisions

of

the

Restated

Agreements

and

Declarations of Trust. NASI funds are offered to employers through
collective bargaining agreements.
H&M

Mechanical

LLC

(“H&M”)

entered

into

a

Collective

Bargaining Agreement with Road Sprinkler Fitters Local Union No.
669.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement required contributions

to the NASI funds for each hour of work by covered employees.
an unknown date, H&M forfeited its corporate status.

On

Defendant

Pablo Romero continues to conduct business as a contractor or
subcontractor in the sprinkler industry both individually and
doing business as H&M Mechanical. Plaintiffs assert an ERISA claim
against H&M, Pablo Romero d/b/a H&M Mechanical, and Pablo Romero
individually, (collectively “Defendants”) for unpaid contributions
for covered employees between July 2023 through October 2024.
According to the Complaint, Defendants were required to make
contributions to the Funds for each hour worked by their employees
performing work covered by the Collective Bargaining Agreement and
to submit forms every month reporting the amount of contributions
due.

The Trust Agreements provide that if an employer fails to

make timely contributions, it must pay liquidated damages and
interest.
Defendants failed to submit reports from July 2023 through
October 2024.

Pursuant to the Restated Trust Agreements, the

Trustees projected the delinquency for each month that reports
2

were not submitted based on the average of the monthly reports
submitted for the prior three months.

Plaintiffs concluded that

the average monthly wages were $15,216 in 2023 and $15,993.60 in
2024. 1

Based on the average monthly wages, monthly contributions

of $11,487.20 were calculated constituting of $3,664 for the
Welfare Fund (which was changed to $3,811.20 in the year 2024),
$134.40 for the Education Fund, $2,304 for the Pension Fund (which
changed to $2,336 in 2024), $4,192 for the Supplemental Pension
Fund, $32 for the International Training Fund, $760.80 for the
Work Assessments (which changed to $799.68 in 2024), $80 for the
Extended Benefit Fund, and $320 for the Industry Advancement Fund.
Plaintiffs assert that Defendants owe $186,040 in contributions
plus $32,364.48 in liquidated damages, $14,986.48 in interest
through October 31, 2024, costs of $755 and attorneys’ fees of
$1,611.50.
The

Trustees

served

Pablo

Romero

on

October

3,

2024,

individually and d/b/a H&M Mechanical, and in his former capacity
as

member

of

the

Mechanical LLC.

now

forfeit

limited

liability

company,

H&M

When Defendants failed to respond timely, the

Trustees moved for the entry of default (ECF No. 9), which was
granted January 7, 2025.

(ECF No. 18).

The Trustees moved for

default judgment on November 25, 2024, seeking a judgment for the

1

The hourly wage rate changed from $47.55 per hour in 2023 to
$49.98 per hour in 2024.
3

contributions

owed

for

July

2023

through

October

2024

plus

liquidated damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. (ECF No.
15).
II.

Standard of Review
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a), “[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, the clerk must enter the party’s default.”

Where a

default has been previously entered by the clerk and the complaint
does not specify a certain amount of damages, the court may enter
a default judgment, upon the plaintiff’s application and notice to
the defaulting party, pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2).

A defendant’s

default does not automatically entitle the plaintiff to entry of
a default judgment; rather, that decision is left to the discretion
of the court.
2002).

See Dow v. Jones, 232 F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (D.Md.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

has a “strong policy” that “cases be decided on their merits,” id.
(citing United States v. Shaffer Equip. Co., 11 F.3d 450, 453 (4th
Cir. 1993)), but default judgment may be appropriate when the
adversary

process

has

been

halted

because

of

an

essentially

unresponsive party, see SEC v. Lawbaugh, 359 F.Supp.2d 418, 421
(D.Md. 2005) (citing Jackson v. Beech, 636 F.2d 831, 836 (D.C.
Cir. 1980)).

Upon entry of default, the well-pled allegations in

a complaint as to liability are taken as true, but the allegations
4

as to damages are not.

Lawbaugh, 359 F.Supp.2d at 422. While the

court may hold a hearing to prove damages, it is not required to
do so; it may rely instead on “detailed affidavits or documentary
evidence to determine the appropriate sum.”

Adkins, 180 F.Supp.2d

at 17 (citing United Artists Corp. v. Freeman, 605 F.2d 854, 857
(5th Cir. 1979)); see also Laborers’ Dist. Council Pension v.
E.G.S., Inc., No. WDQ-09-3174, 2010 WL 1568595, at *3 (D.Md. Apr.
16, 2010) (“[O]n default judgment, the court may only award damages
without a hearing if the record supports the damages requested.”).
III. Analysis
Assuming the truth of the well-pleaded allegations of the
complaint, as the court must upon entry of default, Plaintiffs
have established a violation under ERISA.

Section 502(a)(3)

authorizes parties to enforce the provisions of trust agreements.
See 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3) (providing that a civil action may be
brought:

“(A) to enjoin any act or practice which violates . . .

the terms of the plan, or (B) to obtain other appropriate equitable
relief (i) to redress such violations or (ii) to enforce any . .
. terms of the plan”).

According to the Complaint, H&M is a

signatory to the collective bargaining agreements with the Road
Sprinkler Fitters Local Union No. 669 and is, therefore, obligated
to comply with the terms of the Trust Agreements.

Based on these

undisputed allegations, Plaintiffs have stated a sufficient claim
for relief under ERISA.
5

A.

Unpaid Contributions

Plaintiffs’ motion for the entry of judgment by default seeks
contributions for July 2023 through October 2024.

The Restated

Agreements and Declarations of Trust establishing the NASI Funds
authorize the NASI Funds to project the contributions owed for
months that Defendants failed to submit reports by averaging the
last three months for which reports were submitted and to assess
interest on delinquencies at the rate of twelve percent (12%).
The record supports $186,040 in unpaid contributions.
B.

Liquidated Damages and Interest

Plaintiffs seek $14,986.48 in interest through October 2024,
and

$32,364.48

in

estimated/averaged
October 2024.
Trust

liquidated

contributions

damages
owed

from

assessed

on

July

through

2023

the

The Restated Trust Agreements and Declarations of

establishing

the

NASI

Funds

and

the

Guidelines

for

Participation in the NASI Funds provide that contributions and the
required reporting forms are due on or before the 15th day of each
month following the month in which the work was performed.

If an

Employer does not pay the amounts due to the Fund by the due date,
that Employer is delinquent and, in the discretion of the Trustees,
the following will be added to and become part of the amount due
from the Employer:

(1) liquidated damages in the amount of five

percent (5%) if contributions are more than 60 days late, an
additional five percent (5%) if contributions are 90 days late, an
6

additional five percent (5%) if contributions are 120 days late,
and an additional five percent (5%) if owed contributions are 150
days late, for a total of twenty percent (20%) liquidated damages.
The Trustees’ motion for default judgment and Declaration of
Anna E. Bosmans request $32,364.48 2 as liquidated damages.

This

amount will be awarded.
The Trustees’ motion for default judgment indicates that
$14,986.48 is owed in interest through October 2024. The agreement
between the Trustees and H&M obligates Defendants to pay twelve
percent (12%) interest from the date of delinquency.

Thus, the

interest Plaintiffs request of $14,986.48 through October 31,
2024, will be awarded.
C.

Attorneys’ Fees

Plaintiffs seek $1,611.50 in attorneys’ fees.

In support of

this request, Plaintiffs submit the Declaration of Charles W.
Gilligan regarding attorneys’ fees and costs (ECF No. 15-15).
Exhibit L shows the hours billed by Plaintiffs’ counsel and a
paralegal. (ECF No. 15-16).

It indicates that the firm spent 9.25

hours on this case on behalf of the Plaintiffs at a rate of $374
per hour for attorney time and $150 per hour for paralegal time.
The attorneys’ fees as summarized by Plaintiffs’ attorney
were calculated at the rate of $374/hour for Charles W. Gilligan

2

Twenty percent (20%) of the contributions owed of $186,040 is
$37,208.
7

and at $150/hour for paralegal Teresa Butler.

The sum requested

is consistent with the rates suggested in the court’s Local Rules
and Plaintiffs will be awarded $1,611.50 for attorneys’ fees.
D.

Costs

Plaintiffs seek $755 in costs.

In support of this request,

Plaintiffs state that in addition to the $405 filing fee to
commence this action, $350 was expended for service of process on
Defendants (ECF No. 15-18).

The record supports the requested

amount, and $755 in costs will be awarded to Plaintiffs.
IV.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion for the entry

of default judgment will be granted. A separate order will follow.

/s/
DEBORAH K. CHASANOW
United States District Judge

8