LABORERS' COMBINED FUNDS OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA v. TRAFFIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC. et al

Filing 10

ORDER granting 8 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, as follows. Plaintiff's Motion asserts that the amounts of interest, liquidated damages/late charges, and attorneys' fees are identified in the CBA. To establish these amount s, Plaintiff refers back to the allegations in the Complaint. The Complaint, however, likewise fails to identify relevant provisions of the CBA. The Court independently has reviewed Plaintiff's documents and has found provisions confirming the rates claimed. While the Court is mindful of Plaintiff's desire to save time and contain costs, the Court cannot condone the "cutting of corners," or the shifting of burdens from counsel to the Court in identifying adequate support for requested relief. These and (other things, as explained in this Order) being said, and given the Court's independent determination that supportive provisions are contained in the CBA documents, Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 8 ) is GRANTED. Judgement is entered, as described in this Order. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 4/20/15. (dcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
LABORERS' COMBINED FUNDS
OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA,
Plaintiff,
v.
TRAFFIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 15-218
Judge Cathy Bissoon
Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan

ORDER
Plaintiff’s Amended Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 8) will be granted, as follows.
Plaintiff’s Motion asserts that the amounts of interest, liquidated damages/late charges, and
attorneys’ fees are identified in the CBA. See Pl.’s Mot. at ¶¶ 8-9. To establish these amounts,
Plaintiff refers back to the allegations in the Complaint. See, e.g., id. at ¶ 10 (citing ¶ 7 of
Complaint). The Complaint, however, likewise fails to identify relevant provisions of the CBA.
See Compl. at ¶ 7 (stating amounts owed, but failing to identify supportive provisions of CBA).
The Court independently has reviewed Plaintiff’s documents and has found provisions
confirming the rates claimed. See, e.g., Doc. 9-6 at Art. XXXVII, § 3 (interest rate is 1 ¼ %,
attorney’s fees are 20%, et cetera). While the Court is mindful of Plaintiff’s desire to save time
and contain costs, the Court cannot condone the “cutting of corners,” or the shifting of burdens
from counsel to the Court in identifying adequate support for requested relief.1
Cf. also, e.g., text Order dated Mar. 4, 2014 in Civil Action No. 14-126 (W.D. Pa.) (ordering
same counsel to provide citations “to specific portions of the agreement supporting their position
regarding damages, interest, costs and fees,” and noting, “[t]he Court has specifically instructed
[p]laintiffs’ [c]ounsel to provide such [information] on numerous prior occasions”).
1

Continued on next page...

These things being said, and given the Court’s independent determination that supportive
provisions are contained in the CBA documents, Plaintiff’s Amended Motion for Default
Judgment (Doc. 8) is GRANTED. Thus, Judgment hereby is entered as follows:
COUNT I
Laborers’ Combined Funds of Western Pennsylvania, et al.,
v. Traffic Technologies, Inc., a/k/a Traffic Technologies
Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff(s) and against Defendant Traffic Technologies,
Inc., a/k/a Traffic Technologies, in the amount of $48,610.31, plus additional interest from
April 10, 2015 at the rate of 1¼ % per month.
COUNT II
Laborers’ Combined Funds of Western Pennsylvania, et al., v. Gary J. Cangey
Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff(s) and against Defendant Gary J. Cangey in the
amount of $164,849.88, plus additional interest from April 10, 2015 at the rate of 1 ¼ % per
month.
COUNT III
Laborers’ Combined Funds of Western Pennsylvania, et al., v. Gary J. Cangey
Judgment is entered in favor of the Plaintiff(s) and against the Defendant Gary J. Cangey
in the amount of $14,426.75, plus additional interest from April 10, 2015 at the rate 1 ¼ % per
month.
It is not the Court’s proper function to provide paralegal services for the parties and their
lawyers. In the future, counsel should expect similarly unsupported motions to be summarily
denied.
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

April 20, 2015

s\Cathy Bissoon
Cathy Bissoon
United States District Judge

cc (via ECF email notification):
All Counsel of Record

3