Sheet Metal Workers Locall 98 Pension Fund et al v. Central Ohio Sheet Metal Co., Inc. et al
Filing
39
OPINION AND ORDER granting 36 MOTION for Default Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King on 10/14/11. (rew)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
SHEET METAL WORKERS LOCAL 98
PENSION FUND, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Civil Action 2:10-CV-594
Magistrate Judge King
CENTRAL OHIO SHEET METAL CO.,
INC., et al.,
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, ERISA-qualified employee benefits plans, seek
recovery of allegedly unpaid contributions to the plans.
assert claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 185, 1132.
Plaintiffs
This matter is before the
undersigned, with the consent of the parties, see Rule 26(f) Report, Doc.
No. 15, and pursuant to an order of reference, Order, Doc. No. 37, on
Plaintiffs’ Request for Entry of Default Judgment by the Clerk, Doc. No.
36 [“Motion for Default Judgment”].
The Complaint names as defendants Central Ohio Sheet Metal
Co.,
Inc.[“Central
Ohio
Sheet
Metal”],
signatory
to
a
collective
bargaining agreement with Sheet Metal Workers Local Union No. 24,
Complaint, Doc. No. 2, ¶ 4, and Mark Judy [“Judy”], the owner and chief
executive officer of Central Ohio Sheet Metal and a fiduciary with
respect to plan assets within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(21)(A)(i).
Id. ¶ 13.
Defendants are no longer represented by counsel.
Order, Doc.
No. 23.
After defendants failed to appear at two conferences scheduled
by the Court, see Order, Doc. No. 29; Order, Doc. No. 32, the fact of
defendants’ default was entered. Clerk’s Entry of Default, Doc. No. 35.
Plaintiffs thereafter filed the Motion for Default Judgment.
Although
defendants were expressly provided the opportunity to respond to the
motion, Order, Doc. No. 38, there has been no response to the motion.
In support of the Motion for Default Judgment, plaintiffs offer the
affidavit of their Administrator, Michael R. Keller.
Affidavit of
Michael R. Keller, attached as Exhibit B to Motion for Default Judgment.
According to Mr. Keller, records of the plaintiff funds and the plan
indicate that Central Ohio Sheet Metal is delinquent in payment of
contributions to the Welfare Fund, the Pension Fund and the Retirement
Savings Plan for the months of August 2010 through January 2011.
5.
Id. ¶
According to the parties’ collective bargaining agreement, an
employer
who
contributions,
fails
to
interest
pay
on
contributions
the
unpaid
is
liable
contributions
for
and
the
unpaid
liquidated
damages in the amount of 20% of the unpaid contributions.1 Id. ¶12.
As
of September 9, 2011, the unpaid contributions, interest and liquidated
damages owed to the plaintiff funds, rounded to the nearest dollar, are
as follows:
Pension Fund: $89,090.00
Welfare Fund: $112,013.00
Retirement Savings Plan:
$39, 236.00
for a total of $240,339.00. Id. Moreover, defendant Judy, as a fiduciary
within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 1002(21)(A)(i), is personally liable
1
Also recoverable are reasonable attorney’s fees and, in some
circumstances, punitive damages. Id. Plaintiffs do not request such recovery
in their Motion for Default Judgment.
2
for the losses to the plans caused by the breach of his fiduciary duty
to pay and deliver contributions to the plaintiff plans.
Id. ¶ 13.
See
29 U.S.C. § 1109.
These facts are uncontroverted by defendants.
WHEREUPON plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment, Doc. No. 36, is
GRANTED.
The
Clerk
is
DIRECTED
to
enter
FINAL
JUDGMENT
against
defendants, jointly and severally, as follows:
in favor of Plaintiff Pension Fund: $89,090.00
in favor of Plaintiff Welfare Fund: $112,013.00
in favor of Plaintiff Retirement Savings Plan: $39, 236.00.
Plaintiffs are also awarded the filing fee of $350.00 associated with the
initiation of this action.
The total amount awarded to plaintiffs is
therefore $240,689.00.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 14, 2011
s/ Norah McCann King
Norah McCann King
United States Magistrate Judge
3
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?