Trustees of the Mason Tenders Distrcit Council Welfare Fund v. RC Group Inc
Trustees of the Mason Tenders Distrcit Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund and Training Program Fund v. RC Group Inc
- Jesse Furman
- 1:22-cv-04062
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Trustees of the Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund v. RC Group Inc., Judge Furman confirmed the entire arbitration award and granted nine-percent interest.
The petitioners obtained confirmation of the entire arbitration award and nine-percent prejudgment interest. RC Group Inc., which did not oppose the petition, is bound by the court’s confirmation of the award.
What happened
In Trustees of the Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund and Training Program Fund v. RC Group Inc., the petitioners asked the court to confirm an arbitration award. RC Group Inc. did not respond or seek relief from the award.
The court reviewed the petition and supporting materials as it would a summary-judgment motion, even though the petition was unopposed. It found no genuine dispute about any important fact and concluded that the arbitrator’s decision had more than a minimally reasonable basis. The court also found no basis under the Federal Arbitration Act to cancel the award.
Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the petition to confirm the entire award and granted the request for nine-percent prejudgment interest. He directed the petitioners to file a proposed judgment by June 30, 2022.
The detailed version
- Trustees of the Mason Tenders Distrcit Council Welfare Fund v. RC Group Inc · No. 1:22-cv-04062
- Jesse Furman
- June 23, 2022
Background
On May 18, 2022, the petitioners filed a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award. The petitioners served RC Group Inc. with the petition, supporting materials, and the briefing schedule. RC Group’s opposition was due June 14, 2022, but the company did not respond to the petition or otherwise seek relief from the award.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that an unopposed petition to confirm an arbitration award must still be treated like a motion for summary judgment based on the petitioner’s submissions. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute about a material fact. After reviewing the petition and supporting materials, the court found no such dispute as to any portion of the award. It also concluded that the arbitrator’s decision provided more than a “barely colorable justification” for its result.
The court further found no justification under Section 10(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act for vacating, or setting aside, the award. The court granted the petitioners’ request for prejudgment interest at a rate of nine percent.
Disposition
The court granted the petitioners’ unopposed petition to confirm the entire award. It directed the petitioners to file a proposed judgment electronically by June 30, 2022.
Judge
The memorandum opinion and order was issued by Jesse M. Furman, United States District Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.
Related cases
- Trustees for The Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund…Apr 2023
- New Yorkv. 45th Street
- Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974, Affiliated…Jan 2021
- Super Perfectv. Agroinvestbank Open
- Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund…Jul 2020
- Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund…Mar 2020