Iron Workers' Local 25 Pension Fund et al v. Cook Construction Company et al
ORDER Adopting 11 Report and Recommendation granting 8 Motion for Default Judgment, filed by Iron Workers Local 25 Vacation Pay Fund, Iron Workers Health Fund of Eastern Michigan, Iron Workers' Local 25 Pension Fund, Iron Workers Apprentice Fund of Eastern Michigan. Signed by District Judge Stephen J Murphy, III. (AGre)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TRUSTEES OF THE IRON WORKERS' LOCAL NO. 25 PENSION FUND; IRON WORKERS' HEALTH FUND OF EASTERN MICHIGAN; IRON WORKERS LOCAL NO. 25 VACATION PAY FUND; and IRON WORKERS' APPRENTICE FUND OF EASTERN MICHIGAN, Trust Funds Established and Administered Pursuant to Federal Law, Plaintiffs, v. COOK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a Michigan Corporation, HERBERT J. COOK and HERBERT H. COOK, individually d/b/a WOLVERINE DECK & SIDING, Defendants. / ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (docket no. 11) AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT (docket no. 8) This is a action by trustees of multi-employer benefit trust funds to collect delinquent fringe benefits. This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment against defendants Cook Construction Company, Herbert J. Cook and Herbert H. Cook, individually d/b/a Wolverine Deck and Siding (docket no. 8). Plaintiffs are benefit trust funds, affiliated with the Iron Workers' Local Union No. 25 ("Local 25"), that are established under and administered pursuant to Section 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act ("LMRA"), 29 U.S.C. § 186 and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. On September 29, 2009, plaintiffs brought this action against the defendants for delinquent fringe benefit
Case No. 2:09-cv-13830 HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III
contributions required to be paid under the collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") between Local 25 and defendant Cook Construction Company. The Clerk entered a default against all defendants on November 18, 2009 (docket no. 7). Plaintiffs then filed the present motion for a default judgment on February 11, 2010 (docket no. 8). On February 24, 2010, the motion for default judgment was referred to Magistrate Judge Mark Randon for hearing and determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) (docket no. 9). Magistrate Judge Randon issued a report and recommendation, dated March 25, 2010, in which he recommended that this Court (1) grant plaintiffs' motion for default judgment and enter judgment against defendants in the total amount of $18,172.71; (2) order that the plaintiffs may, within ten days of entry of judgment, move to amend the judgment to include the statutory mandates of U.S.C. §1132(g)(2)(B) and §1132(g)(2)(ii) (statutorily provided interest); and (3) order that jurisdiction of this matter be retained pending compliance with the Court's orders. The Magistrate Judge also notified the parties that any objections must be filed within fourteen days of service. No party has filed objections to the report and recommendation. The Court's standard of review for a magistrate judge's report and recommendation depends upon whether a party files objections. If a party does not object to the report and recommendation, the Court does not need to conduct a review by any standard. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Because neither party filed timely objections to
Magistrate Judge Randon's report and recommendation, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(B)(1)(c); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e), this Court need not and will not conduct a review. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [docket entry 11] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion for default judgment [docket entry 8] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that judgment will be entered against defendants in the total amount of $18,172.71; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs may, within ten (10) days of entry of Judgment, move to amend the judgment to include the statutory mandates of U.S.C. §1132(g)(2)(B) and §1132(g)(2)(ii) (statutorily provided interest); and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that jurisdiction of this matter is retained pending compliance with the Court's orders. s/Stephen J. Murphy, III STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III United States District Judge Dated: June 11, 2010 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on June 11, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. Alissa Greer Case Manager
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?