Boards of Trustees of Ohio Laborers' Fringe Benefit Programs v. RMH Concrete & Foundations, Inc.

Filing 10

OPINION and ORDER adopting 9 the Report and Recommendation; granting 8 Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Judge Michael H. Watson on 1/9/17. (jk)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Boards of Trustees of the Ohio Laborers' Fringe Benefit Programs, Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:16-cv-721 V. Judge Michael H. Watson Magistrate Judge Kemp RMH Concrete & Foundations, Inc., Defendant. OPINION AND ORDER This Is an action for interest on unpaid fringe benefit contributions to employee benefits plans pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement. Plaintiffs assert claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Program, 29 U.S.C. § 1132 ("ERISA"), and the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185 ("LMRA"). The Clerk entered Defendant RMH Concrete & Foundations, inc.'s ("Defendant") default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) on September 22, 2016. ECF No. 5. On December 7,2016, the United States Magistrate Judge recommended that the Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment, ECF No. 8, be granted. Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 9 ("R&R"). The parties were specifically advised of their right to object to the R&R and of the consequences of their failure to do so. Id. at 5-6. The deadline has passed, and there has nevertheless been no objection to the R&R. The R&R, ECF No. 9, is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter FINAL JUDGMENT In favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant in the amount of $77,075.66 in unpaid contributions, liquidated damages, and interest, court costs in the amount of $400.00, and reasonable attorneys' fees in the amount of $2,730.00. IT IS SO ORDERED. riCHAEL H. WATSON, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Case No. 2:16-cv-721 Page 2 of 2

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?