Greater St. Louis Construction Laborers Welfare Fund et al v. Town & Country Masonry and Tuckpointing, LLC
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Contempt 10 is GRANTED and Defendant Town & Country Masonry and Tuckpointing, LLC, is found in CONTEMPT of this Court. As sanctioned, Defendant is liable for a fine of 036;200.00 per day for every day after this date that Defendant fails to submit its records for inspection or otherwise comply with this Court's Orders and Plaintiffs' discovery requests. Plaintiffs' attorney shall contact the Court if and when Defendant produces its records for inspection. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' request for an award of attorneys' fees and costs incurred in bringing their motion for contempt is GRANTED. Counsel for Plaintiffs is grante d until Monday, October 7, 2013 to file an affidavit of fees and costs for the Court's consideration. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' oral motion that the officer of Defendant Town & Country Masonry and Tuckpointing, LLC, be incarcer ated is denied without prejudice to refiling in the event of Defendant's continued non-compliance. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall effect service of this Order and the Court's Order of June 4, 2013 (Doc. No. 9) on Defendant by whatever means they believe to be most effective, and shall promptly file a certificate of such service. Failure to show adequate evidence of prompt service may result in the continuation or cancellation of the compliance fine ordered herein.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 9/27/13. (LGK)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
GREATER ST. LOUIS CONSTRUCTION
)
LABORERS WELFARE FUND, an employee )
benefit plan, et al,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
TOWN & COUNTRY MASONRY and
)
TUCKPOINTING, LLC,
)
)
Defendant.
)
No. 4:13-CV-696-JAR
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter came before the Court for hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Contempt (Doc. No.
10), arising from Defendant Town & Country Masonry and Tuckpointing, LLC’s failure to comply
with a court order compelling it to provide to Plaintiffs all of its books, ledgers, payroll records, cash
disbursement ledgers, bank statements and other documents reflecting or pertaining to all hours
worked by and wages paid to Defendant’s employees from the period August 30, 2006 to the
present. (Doc. No. 9) Plaintiffs appear by counsel. Despite proper notice and personal service on
Defendant’s registered agent, Defendant does not appear.
Courts have authority to award sanctions for contempt in ERISA collection cases where the
Defendant and/or its representative fails to participate in discovery for purposes of determining the
amount of liability for unpaid fringe benefit contributions. Greater St. Louis Const. Laborers
Welfare Fund v. Marshall Contracting, LLC, 2012 WL 4759772, at *1 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 5, 2012)
(citing Greater St. Louis Construction Laborers Welfare Fund v. Aura Contracting, LLC, 2012 WL
2684864, at *1 (E.D. Mo. July 6, 2012)). Appropriate sanctions include monetary fines and the
issuance of a writ of body attachment for incarceration until the contempt is purged. Id.(citing
Fischer v. Marubeni Cotton Corp., 526 F.2d 1338, 1340 (8th Cir.1975) (fines); Painters Dist.
Council No. 2 v. Paragon Painting of Missouri, LLC, 2011 WL 3891870, *1 (E.D.Mo. Sept. 1, 2011)
(body attachment)). In addition, the issuance of an order of contempt, pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 45(e) may include, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b), sanctions
such as attorney's fees and costs. Marshall Contracting, 2012 WL 4759772, at *1. A party seeking
civil contempt bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the alleged
contemnors violated a court order. Id. The Court's contempt power also extends to non-parties who
have notice of the Court's order and the responsibility to comply with it. Greater St. Louis
Construction Laborers Welfare Fund v. Hance Excavating, LLC, 2008 WL 544718, at *2 (E.D. Mo.
February 26, 2008) (citations omitted).
Courts in this district have previously imposed compliance fines in ERISA delinquency
collection cases and ordered a defendant to reimburse the plaintiffs for attorneys' fees incurred in
attempting to compel compliance with a Court order. See, e.g., Marshall Contracting, 2012 WL
4759772, at *1 (and cases cited therein). Incarceration has also been used to compel compliance with
Court orders in the context of ERISA delinquency actions. See, e.g., Paragon Painting, 2011 WL
3891870, at *1; Greater St. Louis Construction Laborers Welfare Fund v. Marvin Steele Enters., No.
4:96–CV–1073 ERW, at* 1 (E.D.Mo. Mar. 21, 1997) (ordering that a bench warrant issue for the
arrest of the individual defendants). In addition, Courts in this District have imposed contempt
sanctions on a corporation's officer who failed to participate in post-judgment discovery in an
ERISA delinquency action. See, e.g., Carpenters' District Council of Greater St. Louis and Vicinity
2
v. DLR Opportunities, Inc., No. 4:07–CV–00061 CAS, at *2 (E.D.Mo. Feb. 22, 2008) (imposing
a compliance fine of $100 per day on the defendant's president).
Pursuant to its Order of September 3, 2013 (Doc. No. 12), the Court held a show cause
hearing on the motion for contempt on September 27, 2013. Prior to the hearing Plaintiffs submitted
an affidavit (Doc. No. 13) verifying personal service by private process server on Defendant of the
Court's show cause order. Defendant did not appear at the hearing.
On the basis of the record before it, the Court finds Defendant in contempt and will award
sanctions against Defendant in the form of a compliance fine and attorney's fees and costs for the
filing of the motion for contempt.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Contempt [10] is GRANTED and
Defendant Town & Country Masonry and Tuckpointing, LLC, is found in CONTEMPT of this
Court. As sanctioned, Defendant is liable for a fine of $200.00 per day for every day after this date
that Defendant fails to submit its records for inspection or otherwise comply with this Court's Orders
and Plaintiffs' discovery requests. Plaintiffs' attorney shall contact the Court if and when Defendant
produces its records for inspection.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' request for an award of attorneys' fees and
costs incurred in bringing their motion for contempt is GRANTED. Counsel for Plaintiffs is granted
until Monday, October 7, 2013 to file an affidavit of fees and costs for the Court’s consideration.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' oral motion that the officer of Defendant
Town & Country Masonry and Tuckpointing, LLC, be incarcerated is denied without prejudice to
refiling in the event of Defendant's continued non-compliance.
3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall effect service of this Order and the
Court's Order of June 4, 2013 (Doc. No. 9) on Defendant by whatever means they believe to be most
effective, and shall promptly file a certificate of such service. Failure to show adequate evidence of
prompt service may result in the continuation or cancellation of the compliance fine ordered herein.
Dated this 27th day of September, 2013.
_____________________________
JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4
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?