Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled May 5, 2025

Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v…

Full caption

Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. Dame Contracting, Inc.

Judge
Victor Marrero
Docket
1:25-cv-02557
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
11
ArbitrationContractSummary JudgmentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters v. Dame Contracting, Judge Marrero granted in part and denied in part confirmation of an arbitration award, awarding $2.77 million but denying costs.

Who this affects

The petitioners—the identified New York benefit funds and the Carpenter Contractor Alliance of Metropolitan New York—received confirmation of the arbitration award, a $2,774,039.72 judgment against Dame Contracting, Inc., attorneys’ fees, and post-judgment interest. Dame must pay the judgment and make its books and records available for an audit; the petitioners did not receive the requested $131.75 in litigation costs.

What happened

In Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters v. Dame Contracting, benefit funds and the Carpenter Contractor Alliance sought to enforce an arbitration award against Dame Contracting, Inc. The award found that Dame failed to comply with a required audit and owed unpaid contributions, damages, fees, and costs. Dame did not participate in the arbitration or oppose the federal petition.

The court confirmed the arbitration award and entered judgment for $2,774,039.72, plus 10.5% annual interest from November 15, 2024, until judgment. Dame must also make its books and records available for an audit within 30 days. The court awarded $1,408.50 in attorneys’ fees and denied the requested $131.75 in litigation costs because the petitioners did not document those expenses. The court also awarded post-judgment interest at the statutory rate.

Judge Marrero granted in part and denied in part the petition, dismissed all pending motions, and closed the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v… · No. 1:25-cv-02557
Judge
Victor Marrero
Date
May 5, 2025

Background

The petitioners are benefit funds in New York and the Carpenter Contractor Alliance of Metropolitan New York. Dame Contracting, Inc. was a member of the Association of the Wall, Ceiling, and Carpentry Industries of New York, Inc., and agreed to be bound by agreements between the Association and the New York City District Council of Carpenters.

The collective bargaining agreement required Dame to make contributions for covered work performed by its employees and to make its books and payroll records available for an audit. Dame refused to submit to an audit covering September 14, 2021, through the then-present date. The petitioners then began arbitration under the agreement.

After notice, the arbitrator held a hearing on October 3, 2024, but Dame did not appear. On November 15, 2024, the arbitrator issued an Opinion and Default Award finding that Dame violated the agreement by failing to comply with the audit request. Based on an estimate submitted by the petitioners, the arbitrator found that unpaid contributions totaled $2,047,011.17 and awarded unpaid contributions, liquidated damages, reasonable fees and costs, and other relief totaling $2,774,039.72. The arbitrator also awarded prejudgment interest at 10.5% per year and ordered Dame to provide its books and records within 30 days.

Federal Court Proceedings

The petitioners filed this action to confirm the arbitration award. Dame did not enter an appearance, respond to the petition, or oppose confirmation. The court treated the unopposed petition as an unopposed motion for summary judgment, meaning a request for judgment because there was no genuine dispute requiring a trial.

Court’s Analysis and Ruling

The court explained that judicial review of an arbitration award is narrowly limited. It found that the arbitrator acted within the scope of the arbitrator’s authority and that the petitioners showed there was no dispute of material fact and that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court therefore confirmed the arbitration award.

The court also found that attorneys’ fees for this confirmation proceeding were proper because Dame had not participated in the arbitration, had not paid the award, and had not opposed the petition. The court found the requested hours and billing rates reasonable and awarded $1,408.50 in attorneys’ fees. It denied the petitioners’ request for $131.75 in costs because they submitted no documentation supporting those expenses.

The order entered judgment against Dame for $2,774,039.72, plus prejudgment interest from November 15, 2024, through the date of judgment at an annual rate of 10.5%. Dame was ordered to make its books and records available within 30 days for an audit. The court awarded post-judgment interest at the statutory rate under 28 U.S.C. § 1961, directed the clerk to dismiss all pending motions, and closed the case. The petition was GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

The authoritative version

Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.