Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 18, 2023

Trustees of the Mason Tenders Distrcit Council Welfare Fund v. AMM Construction…

Full caption

Trustees of the Mason Tenders Distrcit Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund and Training Program Fund v. AMM Construction Inc.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:22-cv-10055
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureArbitration
In one sentence

In Trustees of the Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund v. AMM Construction, Judge Schofield canceled a conference and ordered additional service and scheduling steps.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs seeking confirmation of the arbitration award and AMM Construction, Inc., the respondent that had not appeared.

What happened

Trustees of the Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund, and Training Program Fund v. AMM Construction, Inc. concerns a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award. AMM Construction was served through the New York Secretary of State but had not appeared or responded by the deadline.

The court explained that default judgments are generally not appropriate in proceedings to confirm or overturn arbitration awards. Instead, an unanswered petition is treated like an uncontested request for a decision based on the written record.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield canceled the January 25, 2023, conference. She ordered the plaintiffs to send AMM Construction the petition and civil cover sheet by Federal Express, file proof of service, and file a letter describing efforts to provide actual notice and proposing a schedule for written arguments.

The detailed version

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

Case
Trustees of the Mason Tenders Distrcit Council Welfare Fund v. AMM Construction… · No. 1:22-cv-10055
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Jan. 18, 2023

Background

This action concerns a petition to confirm an arbitration award. The respondent, AMM Construction, Inc., was served through the New York Secretary of State on December 13, 2022, but had not appeared. Its deadline to answer, file a motion, or otherwise respond to the petition was January 3, 2023.

Court’s reasoning

The court stated that default judgments are generally inappropriate in proceedings to confirm or overturn arbitration awards. Citing appellate precedent, it explained that an unanswered petition to confirm or vacate an arbitration award should instead be treated as an uncontested motion for summary judgment, meaning a request for judgment based on the record without a trial.

Order

The court canceled the initial conference scheduled for January 25, 2023. It ordered the plaintiffs, by that date, to serve AMM Construction with the petition and civil cover sheet by Federal Express and file proof of service on the docket. The court also ordered the plaintiffs to file a letter describing their efforts to provide AMM Construction with actual notice of the lawsuit and proposing a briefing schedule for any planned written arguments supporting or opposing the petition. The opinion does not decide whether the arbitration award should be confirmed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.