Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Service Corporation v. West River Masonry
Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Service Corporation v. West River Masonry, Inc.
- John Tunheim
- 0:22-cv-00760
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 5
In Bricklayers v. West River, Judge Tunheim denied contempt, sanctions, show-cause, and fee requests after West River complied.
Bricklayers’ requests for contempt, sanctions, a show-cause order, and attorney’s fees were denied; West River Masonry, Inc. and Scott Kroger were not held in civil contempt.
What happened
Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Service Corporation sued West River Masonry, Inc. over missed reporting and payment obligations under a collective bargaining agreement. After the court ordered West River to provide monthly benefit reports, West River missed the deadline, and Bricklayers asked for contempt, sanctions, a show-cause order, and attorney’s fees.
West River later sent the reports to Bricklayers. Bricklayers did not show that the delay caused it an injury, and the court found that contempt or sanctions would not force further compliance or compensate Bricklayers for a loss.
Judge John R. Tunheim denied Bricklayers’ motion for contempt and sanctions and denied its motion for a show-cause order as moot. He also denied the requests for attorney’s fees because the court was not finding contempt or imposing a fine.
The detailed version
- Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Service Corporation v. West River Masonry · No. 0:22-cv-00760
- John Tunheim
- Dec. 9, 2022
Background
Bricklayers brought the action seeking injunctive relief, monthly fringe benefit reports, and damages based on West River’s alleged failure to report and pay employer contributions required by a collective bargaining agreement. West River did not respond to the complaint or otherwise defend, and the Clerk of Court entered default judgment.
The court later ordered West River to submit complete and accurate monthly fringe benefit reports to Bricklayers within 14 days. West River did not meet that deadline. Bricklayers then filed a motion asking the court to hold West River and its sole owner, Scott Kroger, in civil contempt and impose incarceration or a fine. Bricklayers also sought an order requiring West River and Kroger to explain why they should not be held in contempt, along with attorney’s fees in connection with both motions.
On August 29, 2022, West River sent the reports to Bricklayers.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that civil contempt may be used to force compliance with a court order, compensate a party for losses caused by noncompliance, or both. Bricklayers proved that West River missed the reporting deadline, but West River had since complied. Bricklayers also did not show that it was injured by the delay, having received the reports shortly after filing the motions. The court therefore concluded that contempt and sanctions would neither force West River to comply nor compensate Bricklayers for a loss.
Because West River had complied and the court denied the contempt motion, the court found that the requested show-cause proceeding was moot. The court also concluded that attorney’s fees were inappropriate because it was not holding West River or Kroger in contempt and was not imposing a fine to which fees could be added.
Disposition
The court denied Bricklayers’ Motion for Contempt and for Sanctions. It also denied Bricklayers’ Motion for Order to Show Cause. The court denied the requests for attorney’s fees in both motions. Judge John R. Tunheim signed the order on December 9, 2022.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.