Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund v…

Background

The petitioners were the Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund, the Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Annuity Fund, and District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, A.F.L.-C.I.O. The opinion refers to the Union as the petitioner. United Structure Solution, Inc. was the respondent.

The parties had a collective bargaining agreement requiring disputes to be submitted to the Joint Trade Committee of the Painting and Decorating Industry. On April 7, 2022, a Union representative visited a United Structure jobsite and found four non-Union employees performing work. The representative reported that United Structure had not registered the job or submitted wages and benefits for those employees. The Union then filed a demand for arbitration based on the alleged failure to submit wages and benefits, failure to register a job, and hiring of non-Union labor.

The Joint Trade Committee held a hearing on May 3, 2022, which United Structure did not attend. On May 25, 2022, the Committee issued an award in favor of the petitioner for $24,385. The petitioner later demanded payment, but United Structure did not comply. The petitioner filed the court petition on September 9, 2022, and served it on United Structure. United Structure did not appear, respond, or request additional time.

Legal standard

The Federal Arbitration Act generally requires a court to confirm an arbitration award unless one of the statute’s limited grounds for vacating, modifying, or correcting the award exists. The grounds include evident partiality or corruption by an arbitrator and serious misconduct that prejudiced a party’s rights. A court may also set aside an award if it was issued in manifest disregard of the law, meaning the arbitrators knowingly disregarded a clearly applicable legal rule.

When a petition to confirm an arbitration award is unanswered, the court generally treats it like a motion for summary judgment. 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. Even an unopposed request must be supported by facts showing that confirmation is proper.

Ruling on confirmation

The court reviewed the petition and arbitration award and found no genuine issue of material fact. It also found no indication that the award was obtained through fraud or dishonesty or that the arbitrators acted outside their authority. The court concluded that the award was based on undisputed evidence submitted by the petitioner.

The court therefore granted the petitioner’s motion and confirmed the arbitration award. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment in favor of the petitioner and against United Structure Solution for $24,385 in fines.

Attorneys’ fees and costs

The court also addressed the petitioner’s request for fees and costs. It determined that fees were appropriate because United Structure had not complied with the award and had not appeared to provide a justification for its failure to do so.

The petitioner requested $2,400 for eight hours of work at $300 per hour. Although courts typically require contemporaneous time records, the court found the attorney’s declaration sufficient because it identified the date, time, and details of the work performed. After reviewing the requested hours and rate, the court found them reasonable and approved the $2,400 fee.

The court also granted the petitioner’s request for $540 in filing and statutory costs.

Post-judgment interest and disposition

The court awarded post-judgment interest, which it described as mandatory in civil cases beginning when judgment is entered. The interest is to be calculated at the rate provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

The court’s final disposition was to grant the petitioner’s motion, confirm the $24,385 arbitration award, and enter judgment for $24,385 in fines, $2,400 in attorneys’ fees, $540 in costs, and post-judgment interest. The Clerk was directed to close the case.