Northwest Administrators Inc v. Harold Smith & Son Inc

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedAugust 20, 2020
Docket2:20-cv-00552
StatusUnknown

This text of Northwest Administrators Inc v. Harold Smith & Son Inc (Northwest Administrators Inc v. Harold Smith & Son Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Northwest Administrators Inc v. Harold Smith & Son Inc, (W.D. Wash. 2020).

Opinion

1 HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 NORTHWEST ADMINISTRATORS 11 INC., CASE NO. C20-552-RAJ 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 HAROLD SMITH & SON, INC., a 15 California corporation, 16 Defendant. 17

18 I. INTRODUCTION 19 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment. 20 Dkt. # 8. Having reviewed the record, the Court GRANTS the motion and directs the 21 clerk to enter default judgment as directed at the conclusion of this order. 22 II. BACKGROUND 23 Plaintiff, the authorized administrative agent for and assignee of the Western 24 Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust Fund, brought this action to obtain liquidated 25 damages, interest, attorney’s fees and costs related to Defendant Harold Smith & Son, 26 Inc.’s failure to remit monthly pension contributions in a timely fashion over a four- 27 1 month period. Dkt # 8 at 2. Defendant’s registered agent, Pam Raybould, was properly 2 served on April 24, 2020. Dkt. # 6-1 at 2. Defendant failed to file a response to the 3 complaint. On May 29, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for default against Defendant. Dkt. 4 # 6. On June 1, 2020, a Clerk’s Order of Default was issued. Dkt. # 7. On June 26, 5 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. Dkt. # 8. Defendant again failed to 6 file a response. 7 III. LEGAL STANDARD 8 At the default judgment stage, a court presumes all well-pleaded factual allegations 9 are true, except those related to damages. TeleVideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 10 917-18 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Fair House. of Marin v. Combs, 285 F.3d 899, 906 (9th 11 Cir. 2002). The entry of default judgment under Rule 55(b) is “an extreme measure,” and 12 disfavored cases should be decided on their merits whenever reasonably possible. Cmty. 13 Dental Servs. v. Tani, 282 F.3d 1164, 1170 (9th Cir. 2002); also see Westchester Fire Ins. 14 Co. v. Mendez, 585 F.3d 1183, 1189 (9th Cir. 2009). 15 In addition, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(1) permits a court to enter 16 default judgment when a plaintiff’s claim “is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made 17 certain by computation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(1). In moving a court for default 18 judgment, a plaintiff must submit evidence supporting the claims for a particular sum of 19 damages. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2)(B). In determining damages, a court can rely on 20 declarations submitted by a plaintiff. Dr. JKL Ltd. v. HPC IT Educ. Ctr., 749 F. Supp. 2d 21 1046 (N.D. Cal. 2010). Where there is evidence establishing a defendant’s liability, a 22 court has discretion, not an obligation, to enter a default judgment. Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 23 F.2d 1089, 1092 (9th Cir. 1980); see also Alan Neuman Productions, Inc. v. Albright, 862 24 F.2d 1388, 1392 (9th Cir. 1988). 25 IV. DISCUSSION 26 Plaintiff has presented evidence that establishes that Defendant was delinquent in 27 its monthly contributions to the pension fund for the period between January 2020 1 through April 2020. Dkt # 8 ¶ 11. Defendant made four delayed payments in 2020: (1) 2 January (due February 10, 2020 and received on April 27, 2020); February (due March 3 10, 2020 and received on May 18, 2020); March (due April 10, 2020 and received May 4 18, 2020), and April (due May 10, 2020 and received on June 8, 2020). Id. 5 Pursuant to the terms of the parties’ Agreement and Declaration of Trust, 6 Defendant is required to pay liquidated damages equal to twenty percent of delinquently 7 paid contributions, interest on the amount due, as well as attorney’s fees and costs. Dkt. 8 # 9-1 at 5. Plaintiff has shown the interest rate at the time the contributions were due was 9 five percent per annum. Dkt. # 8-1 at 4. Plaintiff has provided evidence of the amount 10 delinquent for each month and has calculated the total amount due accordingly: 11 Month Delinquent Liquidated damages (20% Interest (5% per 12 contribution of contribution) annum) 13 January 2020 $15,956.50 $3,191.30 $168.31 14 February 2020 $16,247.00 $3,249.40 $153.57 15 March 2020 $17,263.75 $3,452.75 $89.87 16 April 2020 $18,410.00 $3,682.00 $73.14 17 Total $13,575.45 $484.88 18 Dkt. # 9-1 at 11-24. 19 Accordingly, Plaintiff has shown that it is entitled to liquidated damages in the 20 amount of $13,575.45 and interest in the amount of $484.88. Id. Plaintiff has also 21 presented evidence of attorney’s fees and costs. Dkt # 8 ¶ 15. In accordance with 22 Trustees of the Const. Indus. & Laborers Health & Welfare Trust v. Redland Ins. Co., 23 460 F.3d 1253, 1256-57 (9th Cir. 2006), the Court awards the hourly fees of both 24 Plaintiff’s counsel and counsel’s hourly-billing support staff. The Court finds that 25 Plaintiff’s evidence supports an attorney fee award of $1,008 and costs of $545. Dkt. 26 # 8-1 at 6. 27 1 V. CONCLUSION 2 For the reasons stated above, it is hereby ORDERED that: 3 (1) Default judgment is entered in favor of Northwest Administrators Inc. and 4 against Harold Smith & Son Inc.; and, 5 (2) Default judgment is for the total amount of $15,613.33.

6 7 Dated this 20th day of August, 2020. 8 A

9 10 The Honorable Richard A. Jones 11 United States District Judge

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Northwest Administrators Inc v. Harold Smith & Son Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/northwest-administrators-inc-v-harold-smith-son-inc-wawd-2020.