Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Apr. 8, 2022

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

Full caption

Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. Kraus Drapery Installation Inc.

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:21-cv-08369
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
7
ArbitrationSummary JudgmentContract
In one sentence

In Trustees v. Kraus Drapery, Judge Carter confirmed the arbitration award and entered judgment for $1,066,824.57 plus fees, costs, and interest.

Who this affects

The petitioners—the listed carpenter funds and the New York City District Council of Carpenters—received a judgment against Kraus Drapery Installation Inc. for the arbitration award, additional attorneys’ fees and costs, and interest.

What happened

In Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. Kraus Drapery Installation Inc., the Funds and the Union sought to confirm an arbitration award against Kraus Drapery. The dispute concerned required contributions and Kraus Drapery’s refusal to allow an audit of its records. Kraus Drapery did not appear or oppose the petition.

The court confirmed the arbitration award in full. The award totaled $1,066,824.57, including unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, fees, and costs. The court also awarded $917.50 in fees and $77 in costs for the confirmation proceeding, 5.25% interest from the arbitration award date, and post-judgment interest at the statutory rate.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. ruled that the arbitrator acted within the arbitrator’s authority and that the award had at least a minimally sufficient legal basis. He directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment for the Petitioners against Kraus Drapery and close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v… · No. 1:21-cv-08369
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 8, 2022

Background

The petitioners were the Trustees of several funds, the Trustees of the New York City Carpenters Relief and Charity Fund, and the New York City District Council of Carpenters. The Union was the certified bargaining representative for certain employees of Kraus Drapery Installation Inc. The opinion states that Kraus Drapery was bound by an agreement requiring it to make contributions to the Funds and provide books and records for audits. The agreement allowed either side to seek arbitration over payment disputes.

The petitioners requested an audit. Kraus Drapery refused to provide the requested records, so the petitioners conducted an estimated audit under the applicable collection policy. They concluded that Kraus Drapery had not made all required contributions. An arbitrator then ruled for the petitioners and ordered Kraus Drapery to pay $1,066,824.57: $757,010.24 in estimated unpaid contributions, $155,512.28 in interest, $151,402.05 in liquidated damages, $400 in court costs, $1,500 in attorneys’ fees, and $1,000 in arbitrator’s fees. The arbitrator also provided for 5.25% interest from the award’s issuance date. The opinion states that Kraus Drapery paid nothing toward the award.

The petitioners filed this federal court petition to confirm the arbitration award. Kraus Drapery was served, but it did not respond, appear, or oppose the petition. The court explained that confirming an arbitration award is a summary proceeding: the court converts the award into a court judgment and gives substantial deference to the arbitrator. Because the petition was unopposed, the court evaluated it under the standard used for summary judgment, which asks whether there is any genuine dispute about an important fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Court’s Analysis and Ruling

The court confirmed the arbitration award in its entirety. It found that the petitioners had shown no genuine dispute about any material fact. The arbitrator acted within the scope of the arbitrator’s authority, and the findings that Kraus Drapery had to permit an audit and make contributions were supported by the parties’ agreements and policies. The court also found at least a “barely colorable” justification for the award’s components, including interest, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, arbitrator’s fees, and court costs. The court therefore granted the petition to confirm the award for $1,066,824.57.

The court also granted the petitioners’ request for $917.50 in attorneys’ fees and $77 in costs incurred in bringing the confirmation proceeding. It reasoned that Kraus Drapery had neither complied with the award nor offered a justification for failing to do so, and had failed to appear both in the arbitration and in the federal case.

The court granted pre-judgment interest at 5.25%, the rate set by the arbitrator, beginning on the date of the award. It also awarded post-judgment interest beginning when judgment was entered and continuing until payment, at the rate required by federal law. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment for the petitioners, add the specified fees, costs, and interest, and close the case. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.