Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v…

Background

The petitioners were labor-related organizations, including several trust funds governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the New York City Carpenters Relief and Charity Fund, the New York City and Vicinity Carpenters Labor-Management Corporation, and the New York City District Council of Carpenters. Hilt Construction had signed affidavits binding it to two project labor agreements and, through those agreements, to collective bargaining agreements involving the Union.

The collective bargaining agreement required Hilt Construction to make contributions to the funds for covered work and to submit to audits. It also allowed disputes about required payments to be arbitrated. The agreement and the funds’ collection policy allowed recovery of interest, liquidated damages, reasonable costs, and attorney’s fees for unpaid contributions and collection efforts.

An audit covering March 28, 2016, through June 24, 2018, found an alleged contribution deficiency of $16,921.91. After notice of the arbitration hearing, Hilt Construction did not appear. On June 12, 2019, the arbitrator found that Hilt Construction violated the collective bargaining agreement and awarded the petitioners $33,028.32, consisting of the principal deficiency, interest, liquidated damages, non-audit late-payment interest, promotional fund contributions, court costs, attorney’s fees, the arbitrator’s fee, and audit costs. The arbitrator also set interest at 7.5% from the award date.

Hilt Construction did not pay any part of the award and did not ask a court to vacate or modify it. The petitioners filed their court petition to confirm the award on August 14, 2019. Hilt Construction was served but did not timely answer. The petitioners later asked the court to treat the petition as an uncontested motion for summary judgment.

Legal standard

Confirming an arbitration award is a limited court review that normally turns the award into a court judgment. The court explained that it must confirm the award unless a legally recognized basis exists to vacate, modify, or correct it. An award generally must be enforced when there is at least a minimally supportable justification for the arbitrator’s result, even if the court might disagree with the arbitrator’s reasoning or outcome.

Because Hilt Construction did not answer, the court treated the petition as an uncontested motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment is appropriate when the record shows no genuine dispute about a fact that could affect the result. Even when a motion is uncontested, the court must independently review the record and determine whether the moving party is legally entitled to judgment.

Court’s analysis

The court conducted the required limited review of the arbitration agreement and award. It found that the collective bargaining agreement authorized arbitration of disputes about payments to the funds and gave the arbitrator authority to decide the issues and award monetary damages. The arbitration took place before the arbitrator designated by the agreement.

The court found no indication that the arbitrator acted arbitrarily, exceeded the authority granted by the agreement, or acted contrary to law. Based on the record and the narrow standard of review, the court concluded that no disputed material fact prevented confirmation of the award.

The petitioners also requested attorney’s fees and costs for the court proceeding. The court found those fees warranted because Hilt Construction had not complied with the award and had not timely participated in the case. The court found reasonable the documented work totaling $1,076 and the $75 in litigation costs. It also granted post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a).

Disposition

Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the petitioners’ motion. The arbitration award was confirmed, and the Clerk was directed to enter judgment for the petitioners against Hilt Construction in the amount of $33,028.32, plus interest at 7.5% per year from June 12, 2019, through the date judgment was entered. The judgment also included $1,076 in attorney’s fees and $75 in costs, and it would accrue post-judgment interest as required by federal law. The Clerk was directed to close the case.