Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Welfare Fund et al v. Richard's Improvement Building Inc. et al

Filing 29

MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; Judge Tomlinson's R&R (Docket Entry 27) is ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiffs' motion for default (Docket Entry 19) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are awarded a judgment against Defendants . Plaintiffs shall be permitted to provide the Court with supporting documentation for their requested process server and UPS costs within ten (10) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 9/12/2016. C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------X
TRUSTEES OF THE LOCAL 7 TILE INDUSTRY
WELFARE FUND, THE LOCAL 7 TILE INDUSTRY
ANNUITY FUND, and THE TILE LAYERS LOCAL
UNION 52 PENSION FUND, TRUSTEES OF THE
BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES
INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND, TRUSTEES
OF THE INTERNATIONAL MASONRY INSTITUTE,
and TRUSTEES OF THE MARBLE INDUSTRY
PENSION FUND, THE MARBLE INDUSTRY
ANNUITY FUND, AND THE MARBLE INDUSTRY
TRUST FUND

MEMORANDUM & ORDER
15-CV-3898 (JS)(AKT)

Plaintiff,
-againstRICHARD’S IMPROVEMENT BUILDING INC.,
and RICHARD’S FLOORING OF NY INC.,
Defendants.
---------------------------------------X
APPEARANCES
For Plaintiff:
Michael Bauman, Esq.
Nicole Marimon, Esq.
Jonathan Roffe, Esq.
Todd Dickerson, Esq.
Virginia & Ambinder, LLP
40 Broad Street, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10004
For Defendants:

No appearance

SEYBERT, District Judge:
Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen
Tomlinson’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that
this Court grant Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment.
Entry 19.)

(Docket

For the following reasons, the Court ADOPTS Judge

Tomlinson’s R&R in its entirety.

BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs

are

employer

and

employee

trustees

of

multiemployer labor-management trust funds organized pursuant to
collective bargaining agreements between unions and employers (the
“CBAs”).
2015,

(Am. Compl., Docket Entry 11, ¶¶ 4-5, 10.)

Plaintiffs

commenced

this

action

On July 2,

against

defendants

Richard’s Improvement Building Inc. (“Richard’s Improvement”) and
Richard’s

Flooring

of

NY

Inc.

(“Richard’s

Flooring”

and,

collectively, “Defendants”).
On

August

18,

2015,

Plaintiffs

filed

an

Amended

Complaint seeking a judicial determination that: (1) Defendants
are alter egos or successors that have been bound by a collective
bargaining

agreement

Bricklayers

and

between

Allied

Richard’s

Craftworkers

Improvement

Local

Union

and

No.

the

7

(the

“Union”), and (2) Defendants are jointly and severally liable for
their respective judgments.

(Am. Compl. ¶¶ 9, 46.)

Plaintiffs

also seek to hold Richard’s Flooring liable for a judgment of
$560,845.77 previously entered against Richard’s Improvement on
August 1, 2013 (the “Richard’s Improvement Judgment”) along with
post-judgment interest.

(Am. Compl. ¶¶ 20, 52-53.)

On October 21, 2015, Plaintiffs moved for the entry of
a default judgment.
also

requested

(Pl.s’ Mot., Docket Entry 19.)

attorneys’

totaling $755.03.

fees

totaling

$5,536.00

Plaintiffs
and

costs

(Marimon Decl., Docket Entry 21, ¶¶ 26-27.)
2

On

January

16,

2016,

the

undersigned

referred

Plaintiffs’ motion to Judge Tomlinson for an R&R on whether the
motion should be granted and, if necessary, a determination of the
appropriate amount of damages, costs, and/or fees to be awarded.
(Docket Entry 26.)
On

August

1,

2016,

Judge

Tomlinson

issued

her

R&R

recommending that Plaintiffs’ motion be granted and judgment be
entered against Defendants: (1) “declaring that Defendants are
alter egos and/or constitute a single employer, that Defendants
have at all times been bound by the CBAs, and that Defendants are
jointly and severally liable for each other’s judgments,” and (2)
holding Richard’s Flooring liable for the Richard’s Improvement
Judgment.

(R&R at 35.)

The R&R also recommends that Plaintiff be

awarded: (1) post-judgment interest on the Richard’s Improvement
Judgment calculated from August 1, 2013, to the date of payment at
the rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1961, (2) attorneys’ fees
totaling $3,730.00, and (3) costs totaling $462.40.

(R&R at 35.)

The R&R further recommends that Plaintiffs be permitted to provide
supporting documentation for their requested process server and
UPS costs within ten (10) days of the date of this Memorandum and
Order.

(R&R at 35.)

3

DISCUSSION
In reviewing an R&R, a district court “may accept,
reject,

or

modify,

in

whole

or

in

part,

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”
(1)(C).

the

findings

and

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)

If no timely objections have been made, the “court need

only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of
the record.”

Urena v. New York, 160 F. Supp. 2d 606, 609-10

(S.D.N.Y. 2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Objections were due within fourteen (14) days of service
of the R&R.

The time for filing objections has expired, and no

party has objected.

Accordingly, all objections are hereby deemed

to have been waived.
Upon careful review and consideration, the Court finds
Judge Tomlinson’s R&R to be comprehensive, well-reasoned, and free
of clear error, and it ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety.
CONCLUSION
Judge Tomlinson’s R&R (Docket Entry 27) is ADOPTED in
its entirety.
GRANTED.

Plaintiffs’ motion for default (Docket Entry 19) is

Plaintiffs are awarded a judgment against Defendants:

(1) “declaring that Defendants are alter egos and/or constitute a
single employer, that Defendants have at all times been bound by
the CBAs, and that Defendants are jointly and severally liable for
each other’s judgments,” and (2) “holding Defendant Richard’s
Flooring liable for the August 1, 2013 Judgment of $560,845.77
4

previously entered against Richard’s Improvement.”
35.)

(See R&R at

Plaintiffs are also awarded: (1) post-judgment interest on

the August 1, 2013 Judgment against Richard’s Improvement at the
rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1961, calculated from August 1, 2013,
to

the

date

of

payment,

(2)

attorneys’

fees

in

the

sum

of

$3,730.00, and (3) costs in the sum of $462.40.
Plaintiffs shall be permitted to provide the Court with
supporting documentation for their requested process server and
UPS costs within ten (10) days of the date of this Memorandum and
Order.

SO ORDERED.
/s/ JOANNA SEYBERT______
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.
Dated:

September
12 , 2016
Central Islip, New York

5