Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Substantive rulingFiled Aug. 18, 2026

Cement Masons v. Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley

Full caption

Cement Masons, Plasterers, and Shophands Service Corporation v. Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley, individually

Judge
John Tunheim
Docket
0:24-cv-03827
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
3
ErisaFee PetitionSummary Judgment
In one sentence

Judge Tunheim granted Cement Masons, Plasterers, and Shophands Service Corporation's motion for attorney's fees, ordering defendants Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley to pay $46,943.00 under federal pension law.

Who this affects

Employers who are required to make contributions to multiemployer employee benefit plans under ERISA, and plan fiduciaries who sue to enforce those contribution obligations, may be affected by this ruling, which illustrates that attorney's fees are mandatory when a plan prevails on such a claim.

What happened

In Cement Masons, Plasterers, and Shophands Service Corporation v. Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley, the court previously granted summary judgment against the defendants, finding them jointly and severally liable for unpaid fringe benefit contributions, liquidated damages, and interest under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), a federal law governing employee benefit plans. The plaintiff then filed a motion seeking attorney's fees from the defendants.

Under ERISA, when a plan fiduciary successfully sues to enforce an employer's obligation to make contributions to a multiemployer benefit plan, an award of reasonable attorney's fees is mandatory. The defendants did not oppose any part of the motion. The court reviewed the plaintiff's billing records and found that the attorneys' hourly rates — ranging from $225 to $390 per hour — and the total of 132.9 hours billed were both reasonable.

Judge John R. Tunheim granted the plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees and ordered the defendants, Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley, to pay $46,943.00 in attorney's fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cement Masons v. Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley · No. 0:24-cv-03827
Judge
John Tunheim
Date
Aug. 18, 2026

Background

This case arises under ERISA (the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1132), a federal statute governing employee benefit plans. In April 2026, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Cement Masons, Plasterers, and Shophands Service Corporation, finding defendants Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley jointly and severally liable for unpaid fringe benefit contributions, liquidated damages, and interest under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2)(A)–(D). The plaintiff then moved for attorney's fees on May 13, 2026.

Legal Standard

ERISA's fee-shifting provision, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2)(D), mandates an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs when a fiduciary successfully sues to enforce an employer's obligation to make contributions to a multiemployer plan and a judgment in favor of the plan is awarded. The court cited prior district court authority confirming this mandatory nature. Defendants did not oppose any aspect of the fee motion.

Analysis

Hourly Rates

The court found the plaintiff's requested hourly rates — ranging from $225 to $390 per hour — to be reasonable, citing a prior District of Minnesota decision that approved a comparable range of $160 to $385 per hour.

Hours Billed

The court reviewed the documentation submitted in support of 132.9 total hours of legal work billed in this case and found those hours to be reasonable.

Total Fee Award

Based on the reasonable rates and hours, and defendants' liability under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2)(D), the court ordered defendants to pay $46,943.00 in attorney's fees.

Disposition

Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees (Docket No. 49) was granted. The court ordered defendants Surface Pros LLC and Stacey Ripley to pay plaintiff $46,943.00 in attorney's fees, with judgment to be entered accordingly.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.