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

Background

The petitioners were the trustees of several New York City carpenter funds, the Trustees of the New York City Carpenters Relief and Charity Fund, and the Carpenter Contractor Alliance of Metropolitan New York. Mahi Painting, Inc. was bound to a collective bargaining agreement through a project labor agreement. The collective bargaining agreement required covered employers to make contributions for covered employees and to make their books and payroll records available for audits.

The agreement and the Funds’ collection policy provided that, if an employer refused an audit, the Funds could estimate delinquent contributions using the highest average weekly hours reported during any four consecutive weeks in the audit period. The policy also provided for interest, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs in appropriate collection proceedings.

The Funds requested an audit covering July 16, 2020, through the date of the request. Mahi did not provide its books and records. The Funds then initiated arbitration. After receiving notice, Mahi did not appear at the April 14, 2022 hearing. The arbitrator found that Mahi violated the collective bargaining agreement by refusing the audit and awarded the Funds $19,843.98 in estimated principal, $783.36 in interest, $3,968.80 in liquidated damages, $400 in court costs, $1,500 in attorneys’ fees, and a $1,000 arbitrator’s fee. The arbitrator also ordered 5.25% interest on the award from the date it was issued.

Mahi did not pay the award, enter an appearance, or file anything in the federal case. The petitioners asked the court to confirm the award and to award additional interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs.

Legal standard

The petition was brought under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, which gives federal courts authority over petitions to confirm labor arbitration awards. Judicial review of such an award is very limited. The court does not reconsider the arbitrator’s factual or legal conclusions; it asks whether the arbitrator acted within the authority granted by the collective bargaining agreement and based the decision on that agreement.

Because the petition was unopposed, the court treated the petition and supporting evidence like an unopposed motion for summary judgment. Even an unopposed motion must be supported by undisputed facts showing that the moving party is legally entitled to relief.

Court’s analysis

The court found no indication that the award was obtained through fraud or dishonesty, that the arbitrator disregarded the collective bargaining agreement, or that the arbitrator acted outside the authority granted by the parties’ agreements. The record showed that the Funds attempted to audit Mahi, that Mahi denied the audit requests, and that the arbitrator based the award on the agreements and undisputed evidence. The court therefore granted the petitioners’ motion and confirmed the award, including 5.25% annual prejudgment interest from the award date through the date of judgment.

The court also granted the petitioners’ request for post-judgment interest. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1961, that interest was to accrue at the statutory rate from entry of judgment until Mahi paid the judgment in full.

The court held that attorneys’ fees and costs for bringing the confirmation case were justified. Mahi had not complied with the arbitration award and had provided no justification for its failure to do so. The collection policy also authorized recovery of attorneys’ fees for enforcing the Funds’ audit rights.

The petitioners requested $1,147.50 in attorneys’ fees based on 5.3 hours of work and $181.10 in costs. The court found the documented work and total hours reasonable. It approved the $350 hourly rate for Charles Virginia, a partner, and the $120 hourly rate for legal assistants. But it reduced Maura Moosnick’s requested hourly rate from $275 to $225. The court awarded $982.50 in attorneys’ fees and $108.85 in costs.

Disposition

The court granted the petition to confirm the arbitration award. It directed the Clerk to enter judgment for the petitioners in the amount of $27,496.14, plus prejudgment interest at 5.25% per year from April 14, 2022, through the date of judgment, and $1,163.60 in attorneys’ fees and costs. Post-judgment interest was to accrue at the statutory rate until payment in full. The court also directed the Clerk to close the case.