Locals 302 and 612 of the International Union of Operating Engineers Construction Industry Health and Security Fund et al v. Alaska Industrial LLC

Filing 8

ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 6 Motion for Default Judgment without prejudice to renewing the motion in a manner that comports with the governing rules of procedure. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 LOCALS 302 AND 612 OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY HEALTH AND SECURITY FUND, et al., 10 11 12 13 CASE NO. C16-1936JLR ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT Plaintiffs, 14 v. 15 ALASKA INDUSTRIAL LLC, 16 Defendant. 17 18 Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment against Defendant 19 Alaska Industrial LLC. (Mot. (Dkt. # 6).) Plaintiffs have failed to comply with the 20 requirements of Local Civil Rule 55(b). Accordingly, the court DENIES Plaintiffs’ 21 motion without prejudice. 22 // ORDER - 1 1 Plaintiffs’ motion consists of one paragraph that references an affidavit and a 2 declaration by Plaintiffs’ counsel. (Mot. at 1 (citing Reid Affidavit (Dkt. # 6 at 2-8); 3 Kafer Decl. (Dkt. # 7).) Attorney Russell J. Reid’s affidavit functions as a memorandum 4 of law in support of the motion for default. (See Reid Affidavit.) In support of the 5 factual propositions in that affidavit, Mr. Reid cites to lengthy exhibits without providing 6 pincites to a page and line number. (See, e.g., id. ¶ 7 (citing Kafer Decl. ¶ 8, Exs. A-B).) 7 Although attorney Richard Kafer’s declaration provides some pincites to the relevant 8 pages of the relevant documents, the court must match the general assertions in Mr. 9 Reid’s affidavit with the more specific explanations in Mr. Kafer’s declaration. (See 10 generally Kafer Decl.) Moreover, neither the affidavit nor the declaration sufficiently 11 explain the spreadsheet that Plaintiffs contend supports their calculations, including the 12 manner in which Plaintiffs applied and compounded interest. (See id. ¶ 20, Ex. G.) This 13 format does not constitute a “concise explanation of how all amounts were calculated” or 14 otherwise satisfy Plaintiffs’ evidentiary burden. Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 55(b)(2). 15 As best the court could match the evidentiary support to the assertions made in 16 Mr. Reid’s affidavit, there appears to be at least one error. Citing to Exhibits C, D, and E 17 of the Kafer Declaration, Mr. Reid avers that Alaska Industrial owes “liquidated damages 18 equal to twelve percent (12%) of all delinquent and delinquently paid contributions.” 19 (Reid Decl. ¶ 8.) However, Exhibit E indicates that Alaska Industrial “shall be liable for 20 a liquidated damage charge in the sum of twenty percent (20%) of the amount of [its] 21 delinquency.” (Kafer Decl. ¶ 12, Ex. E at 166.) This apparent oversight calls into 22 // ORDER - 2 1 question the veracity of the other assertions and calculations, which are insufficiently 2 supported by citation and explanation. 3 Local Civil Rule 55 places a heavy legal and evidentiary burden on a party seeking 4 entry of default or default judgment because such relief is obtained without the benefit of 5 the adversarial process. Plaintiffs fail to satisfy that burden. The court accordingly 6 DENIES Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment (Dkt. # 6) without prejudice to renewing 7 the motion in a manner that comports with the governing rules of procedure. 8 Dated this 23rd day of March, 2017. 9 10 A 11 JAMES L. ROBART United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ORDER - 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?