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

Background

On June 15, 2020, the petitioners filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award. The court set a briefing schedule, and the petitioners served Unique Contracting Corp. with the petition, supporting materials, and schedule. Unique Contracting’s opposition was due July 14, 2020, but the respondent did not respond to the petition or otherwise seek relief from the award.

Analysis

The court stated that an unopposed petition to confirm an arbitration award must be treated like a motion for summary judgment based on the petitioner’s submissions. After reviewing those materials, the court found no genuine issue of material fact preventing summary judgment as to any portion of the award. It concluded that the arbitrator’s decision provided more than a “barely colorable justification for the outcome reached.” The court also found no justification under Section 10(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act for vacating the award.

The court further found that the petitioners had proven the reasonableness and necessity of the hours worked, rates charged, and litigation costs incurred. It awarded the requested attorneys’ fees and costs and held that the petitioners were entitled to post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a). The opinion noted a discrepancy: the petitioners requested liquidated damages of $681,058.48, while the arbitration award calculated those damages as $681,058.84.

Disposition

Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the petitioners’ unopposed petition to confirm the entire arbitration award. The court directed the petitioners to file a proposed judgment electronically by July 31, 2020. The opinion does not state the final judgment amount or otherwise explain how the liquidated-damages discrepancy would be handled.