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

Background

On September 12, 2022, the petitioners filed a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award. The court later set a briefing schedule for the petitioners’ additional supporting materials, Innis Construction’s opposition, and the petitioners’ reply. The petitioners served Innis Construction with the petition, supporting materials, and briefing schedule. Innis Construction’s opposition was due by October 9, 2023, but it did not respond to the petition or otherwise seek relief from the award.

Court’s analysis

Although the petition was unopposed, the court treated it like a motion for summary judgment, which asks whether the submitted materials show that no genuine dispute of important fact prevents judgment. After reviewing the petition and supporting materials, the court found no genuine issue of material fact concerning any part of the arbitration award. The court also found that the arbitrator’s decision provided more than a minimally plausible justification for its result. In addition, the court found no basis under Section 10(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act to vacate the award.

The court also addressed post-judgment interest. It stated that interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) is mandatory and applies to actions seeking confirmation of arbitration awards. Interest therefore accrues at the statutory rate from the date judgment is entered until payment is made.

Ruling

Judge Arun Subramanian ordered and adjudged that the petition and motion were granted. The court confirmed the September 15, 2021 arbitration award in all respects, awarded the petitioners $134,029.36, and awarded post-judgment interest at the statutory rate. Judgment was entered in favor of the petitioners and against Innis Construction, Inc.