Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund v. FE Demolition West, LLC
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:23-cv-06079
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund v. FE Demolition West, Judge Chhabria granted the plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment.
Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund and the other plaintiffs received a default judgment against FE Demolition West, LLC; the opinion does not state the judgment amount.
What happened
Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund and other plaintiffs sought money from FE Demolition West, LLC for unpaid contributions. The defendant did not appear in the case.
The court found that it had authority to enter a default judgment and that the complaint’s allegations were supported by the record. It also found that the amount at stake was relatively small, the default did not appear excusable, and the defendant’s failure to appear suggested that no important facts were disputed.
Judge Chhabria granted the motion for default judgment against FE Demolition West. The court said that deciding the case on its merits was impossible because the defendant did not appear and that default judgment was likely the only way for the plaintiffs to recover what they were owed. A separate judgment will follow.
The detailed version
- Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund v. FE Demolition West, LLC · No. 3:23-cv-06079
- Vince Chhabria
- May 13, 2024
Background
The plaintiffs moved for default judgment against FE Demolition West. The opinion refers to the plaintiffs’ claim for unpaid contributions and states that they sought damages incurred after filing the complaint as well. The complaint had notified FE Demolition West that it could be liable for unpaid contributions through the time of judgment.
Court’s Analysis
The court concluded that it had jurisdiction to enter default judgment under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e). It applied the factors from Eitel v. McCool, which guide whether a court should enter judgment when a defendant has failed to appear. The court found that the complaint’s allegations were well pleaded and supported by the record; the amount of money at stake was relatively small; there was no reason to believe the default resulted from excusable neglect; and FE Demolition West’s failure to appear suggested that no material facts were disputed. The court also stated that the defendant’s nonappearance made a decision on the merits impossible.
Ruling
The court granted the motion for default judgment against FE Demolition West. It stated that default judgment was likely the only way for the plaintiffs to recover what they were owed. The court ordered that a separate judgment would follow. The opinion does not state the amount of that judgment.
Judge
The order was signed by Vince Chhabria, United States District Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.