Painters District Council No. 2 Pension Trust et al v. Winker, Inc. et al

Filing 7

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 3 ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint, [Doc. No. 3], is denied. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 2/6/14. (CEL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
PAINTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL NO 2
PENSION TRUST, et al.,
Plaintiff,
v.
WINKER INC., et al,
Defendant,

)
)
)
)
)
) Case No. 4:13CV626 HEA
)
)
)
)

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’
Complaint, [Doc. No. 3]. Plaintiffs oppose the motion. For the reasons set forth
below, the Motion to Dismiss is denied.
Plaintiffs brought this action seeking to recover allegedly delinquent
employer contributions to various ERISA trusts, and for an audit of Defendants’
books and business records.
Defendants argue that though Plaintiffs state that they are seeking
contributions from the two defendant companies and the individual defendant
based on a guaranty, Plaintiffs are actually engaged in a “witch hunt” against
Defendants. Included in Defendants arguments are allegations regarding matters
outside Plaintiffs’ Complaint.

Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), an action may be dismissed if the Complaint fails
to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. When reviewing a complaint,
the Court is limited to the pleadings, and may not consider matters outside the
pleadings unless the Court converts the motion to dismiss to one for summary
judgment. In the event of the latter, the Court must give the opposing party an
opportunity to gather the necessary proof to oppose a motion for summary
judgment.
The Court believe that it is more appropriate at this point in the litigation to
deny the motion to dismiss rather than convert it to a motion for summary
judgment. The case is relatively newly filed and the parties have not had the
opportunity to engage in any discovery based on the allegations in the Complaint.
It would be counterproductive to allow a motion for summary judgment at this
stage.
Accordingly
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs’ Complaint, [Doc. No. 3], is denied.
Dated this 6th day of February, 2014.
_______________________________
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-2-