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

Background

The petitioners were two union-related benefit funds, 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. Inner City Concepts LLC had entered into an agreement with the Union that required it to make contributions to the funds for covered work and to provide books and payroll records for an audit. The agreement also contained an arbitration clause covering disputes about payments to the funds and made an arbitrator’s award final and binding.

A dispute arose after Inner City failed to give the funds access to its records. The funds estimated that Inner City owed a principal deficiency and initiated arbitration before Roger Maher. Inner City did not attend the July 15, 2019 hearing. On July 18, 2019, Maher found that Inner City violated the agreement and ordered it to pay $2,416,118.21, according to the opinion’s factual discussion. The award included a principal deficiency, interest, liquidated damages, court costs, attorney’s fees, and the arbitrator’s fee. Maher also set interest at 7.5% from the award date. Inner City did not pay the award and did not ask a court to vacate or modify it.

Court Proceedings and Standard

The petitioners filed the federal petition to confirm the arbitration award on August 27, 2019. Inner City was served but did not answer. The court directed Inner City to respond to the petitioners’ request to treat the petition as an unopposed motion for summary judgment, and Inner City again did not respond.

The court explained that an unanswered petition to confirm an arbitration award is treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment. Even when a motion is unopposed, the court must review the record and decide whether the moving party is legally entitled to judgment. Arbitration awards receive very limited judicial review and generally must be confirmed unless a recognized basis exists to vacate, modify, or correct them.

Ruling

The court conducted the required limited review of the agreement and the arbitration. It found that the agreement authorized arbitration, that Maher was one of the arbitrators identified in the agreement, and that Maher heard evidence about the agreement, Inner City’s failure to provide records, and the damages calculation. The court found no indication that the decision was arbitrary, exceeded the arbitrator’s authority, or violated the law. It therefore found no disputed material fact and confirmed the award.

The court also granted the petitioners’ request for $880 in attorney’s fees and $75 in costs incurred in seeking confirmation. It granted post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a). The conclusion directed the Clerk to enter judgment in favor of the petitioners against Inner City, with 7.5% interest accruing from July 18, 2019 until entry of judgment, and to add the attorney’s fees and costs. The Clerk was directed to close the case.

Amount Discrepancy in the Opinion

The opinion’s factual discussion states that the arbitration award was $2,416,118.21. Its conclusion instead prints the judgment amount as “$2,416,11.21,” which appears incomplete or inconsistent. The opinion also lists individual award components whose stated total does not obviously match the earlier total. The exact judgment amount should therefore be verified from the entered judgment or docket.