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

Background

The petitioners were the trustees of several funds, The Carpenter Contractor Alliance of Metropolitan New York, and the New York City District Council of Carpenters. The court identified the Council as a labor organization and the certified bargaining representative for certain employees of Vica Industries Inc. During the relevant period, Vica was bound by a collective bargaining agreement with the Council.

The agreement required Vica to make contributions to the funds for each hour worked by its employees within the Council’s trade and geographic jurisdiction. It also required Vica to submit its books and records for an audit. Disputes about payments to the funds could be submitted to arbitration.

An audit found that Vica had failed to make all required contributions for the period from February 27, 2018, through November 17, 2019. The petitioners submitted the dispute to arbitration. After a hearing, the arbitrator issued an award on June 17, 2020, requiring Vica to pay $136,509.26, including unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, late-payment interest, court costs, attorneys’ fees, arbitrator’s fees, audit costs, additional shortages, and related interest and liquidated damages. The arbitrator also provided for interest at 6.75% from the date of the award.

The petitioners filed the court petition to confirm the award on September 2, 2020. Vica was served but did not answer, respond to the court’s order to show cause, appear, or otherwise oppose confirmation. The opinion states that Vica had not paid any portion of the award and that the award had not been vacated or modified.

Legal standard

An arbitration award does not automatically become enforceable as a court judgment. Under the Federal Arbitration Act, a court may confirm the award through a streamlined proceeding. The court gives substantial deference to the arbitrator and generally confirms an award when there is at least a barely colorable justification for the arbitrator’s result and no indication that the arbitrator acted arbitrarily, exceeded authority, or acted contrary to law.

Although Vica did not oppose the petition, the court still had to review the petitioners’ evidence. The court evaluated the unopposed request under the summary-judgment standard, which asks whether there is any genuine dispute over a material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law.

Rulings

The court confirmed the arbitration award in its entirety. It found that the agreement submitted contribution disputes to arbitration, that the arbitrator acted within the scope of that authority, and that the award’s components were supported by the parties’ agreements and applicable policies. The court therefore found sufficient justification for every part of the award and confirmed a total of $136,509.26.

The court also granted the petitioners’ request for $665 in attorneys’ fees and $75 in costs incurred in bringing the confirmation proceeding. It found those amounts reasonable because Vica had neither complied with the award nor offered a justification for failing to do so.

The court granted pre-judgment interest at the arbitrator’s rate of 6.75%. It also awarded post-judgment interest under the statutory rate for federal civil judgments, beginning when judgment was entered and continuing until payment. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment for the petitioners and close the case.