Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Apr. 30, 2024

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

Full caption

Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. All Aces Corp.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:23-cv-09929
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
10
ArbitrationContractFee Petition
In one sentence

Trustees of NYC Carpenters Funds v. All Aces Corp.: Judge Schofield confirmed a $30,247.41 arbitration award and denied All Aces’s request to vacate it.

Who this affects

The Funds obtained enforcement of the arbitration award against All Aces Corp. All Aces was ordered to pay $30,247.41 under the award, $7,378 in attorney’s fees, $421.39 in costs, and statutory post-judgment interest.

What happened

In Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Funds v. All Aces Corp., the Funds asked the court to enforce an arbitration award requiring All Aces to pay unpaid employee-benefit contributions and related amounts. All Aces opposed enforcement and asked the court to cancel the award.

The arbitrator found that All Aces had failed to pay $16,954.02 in required contributions and awarded the Funds $30,247.41, including interest, liquidated damages, audit costs, fees, and other costs. All Aces argued that it had not agreed to arbitration and that the arbitration process was unfair.

Judge Schofield granted the petition to confirm the award and denied All Aces’s request to vacate it. She also awarded the Funds $7,378 in attorney’s fees and $421.39 in costs, plus interest at the statutory rate from the date judgment was entered until payment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v… · No. 1:23-cv-09929
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Apr. 30, 2024

Background

Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund; Trustees of the New York City Carpenters Relief and Charity Fund; and the Carpenter Contractor Alliance of Metropolitan New York, collectively called the Funds, petitioned under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act to confirm an arbitration award. All Aces Corp. opposed the petition and cross-petitioned to vacate, or cancel, the award.

All Aces employed union members to perform construction work under agreements that required covered employers to make contributions to jointly managed employee-benefit funds. Those agreements also required employers to provide books and payroll records for audits and generally directed disputes about unpaid contributions to arbitration. The agreements allowed recovery of unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, audit costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees and collection costs.

An audit covering September 20, 2020, through December 31, 2021, found that All Aces had failed to pay $16,954.02 in contributions. After All Aces did not pay that amount, the Funds initiated arbitration before Arbitrator J.J. Pierson. Following a hearing, the arbitrator issued an award on August 2, 2023, requiring All Aces to pay $30,247.41. The award included the principal delinquency, interest, non-audit late-payment interest, liquidated damages, audit costs, promotional-fund contributions, attorney’s fees, court costs, and arbitration costs.

Arguments and analysis

The court explained that review of a labor arbitration award is narrowly limited. The court could determine whether the arbitrator acted within the authority granted by the collective bargaining agreement, but it could not reconsider the arbitrator’s factual findings or contract interpretation merely because a party disagreed with them.

All Aces argued that it had never agreed to arbitrate because its project manager, rather than an executive officer, signed the project labor agreement’s letter of assent. The court rejected that argument. It found that All Aces voluntarily participated in the arbitration by requesting two postponements, appearing through counsel, arguing about the letter of assent, and providing information after the hearing. The court also found that All Aces had accepted direct benefits under the agreement by performing construction work and presumably being paid for it. These circumstances bound All Aces to the arbitration agreement.

All Aces also argued that the arbitration was procedurally unfair because the Funds began with a notice of intent to arbitrate rather than a detailed claim and because All Aces could not conduct discovery. The court held that these were not proper grounds for overturning the award under the limited review applicable to labor arbitration. It further concluded that the notice complied with the collective bargaining agreement and that All Aces had enough information and opportunity to prepare and participate meaningfully in the arbitration.

Attorney’s fees, costs, and judgment

The court held that the collective bargaining agreement authorized attorney’s fees and costs for an action to recover delinquent contributions. It found reasonable the Funds’ request for $7,378 in attorney’s fees for 27.3 hours of work at the stated rates. The court reduced the requested costs from $823.39 to $421.39 because the $402 filing fee had already been included in the arbitration award.

The petition to confirm the arbitration award was granted, and All Aces’s cross-petition to vacate the award was denied. The court entered judgment for the Funds for $30,247.41 under the award, plus $7,378 in attorney’s fees and $421.39 in costs, totaling $38,046.80. Interest was to accrue from the date judgment was entered until payment at the statutory rate under 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 10-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.