Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v…

Background

The petitioners were the named pension, welfare, annuity, apprenticeship, retraining, educational, and industry 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. They sought confirmation and enforcement of an arbitration award against Tim Phillips, doing business as Phillips Creative Installations.

The action arose under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. The court said Phillips was bound by an international agreement and a collective bargaining agreement with the union. The collective bargaining agreement required contributions to the funds and required Phillips to provide books and payroll records for audits. It also allowed arbitration of disputes concerning fund payments.

The dispute began when Phillips failed to permit an audit covering October 10, 2012, through the present. The designated arbitrator, Roger E. Maher, held a hearing and issued an award in favor of the petitioners. The background section identifies the award date as January 18, 2019, and states that the award totaled $716,865.41: $513,626.40 in estimated unpaid contributions, $98,113.73 in interest, $102,725.28 in liquidated damages, $400 in court costs, $1,500 in attorneys’ fees, and $500 in arbitrator’s fees. The award also provided for 7.5% annual interest from its issuance date.

Phillips did not pay any part of the award, did not appear in the action, and did not respond to the court’s order directing him to explain why he had not answered. The opinion states that Phillips had acted without a lawyer when requesting extensions of time to respond.

Legal standard

Because the petition was unopposed, the court treated it as a motion for summary judgment based on the petition and supporting record. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute about a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law.

The petitioners sought confirmation under the Federal Arbitration Act. The court explained that judicial review of an arbitration award is narrowly limited and that courts generally give arbitration decisions substantial deference. A court must confirm an award unless the party seeking to overturn it proves one of the limited statutory grounds for vacatur, such as fraud, corruption, arbitrator misconduct, or the arbitrator’s exceeding the granted authority. The Second Circuit also recognizes the limited ground of “manifest disregard” of the law, meaning that an arbitrator knowingly ignored clear and applicable law in a way that produced an erroneous result.

Court’s analysis

The court found no reason to vacate, modify, or correct the award. Phillips had not appeared or moved to vacate it, and the record provided no basis to infer corruption, misconduct, abuse of authority, or manifest disregard of the law by Maher. The court said the award appeared reasonable in light of the collective bargaining agreement and the facts reflected in the award.

The court also found the petitioners’ requested attorneys’ fees of $2,972.50 reasonable and appropriate. It awarded post-judgment interest as required by federal law.

Disposition

Judge Victor Marrero granted the deemed motion for summary judgment. The order also granted the petition, confirmed the underlying arbitration award, and entered judgment for the petitioners against Tim Phillips, doing business as Phillips Creative Installations.

The judgment awarded $716,865.41 under the arbitration award, plus 7.5% annual interest from the award date through judgment; $75 in costs arising from the court proceeding; $2,972.50 in attorneys’ fees arising from the proceeding; and post-judgment interest at the statutory rate.

The opinion contains a date inconsistency: its background identifies the arbitration award as dated January 18, 2019, while the judgment refers to a January 18, 2020 award. The background lists $400 in court costs as part of the arbitration award, while the judgment separately awards $75 in costs for the court proceeding.