Teamsters Local 456 Pension, Health & Welfare, Annuity, Education & Training, Industry Advancement, and Legal Services Funds v. PCI Industries Corp.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedMay 4, 2023
Docket7:21-cv-09316
StatusUnknown

This text of Teamsters Local 456 Pension, Health & Welfare, Annuity, Education & Training, Industry Advancement, and Legal Services Funds v. PCI Industries Corp. (Teamsters Local 456 Pension, Health & Welfare, Annuity, Education & Training, Industry Advancement, and Legal Services Funds v. PCI Industries Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Teamsters Local 456 Pension, Health & Welfare, Annuity, Education & Training, Industry Advancement, and Legal Services Funds v. PCI Industries Corp., (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Opinion

T. King Benjamin M. Burdick ® Plaintiffs’ request for a conference to discuss the ™ ome Se Blitman consolidation of this case is DENIED. L. Wagner F. Wesley Turner R, Bauman The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to athaniel G. Lambright Attorneys and Couf terminate the motion sequence pending at Doc. 53. aniel €. Of Counsel aniel R. Brice* James R. LaVaute Syracuse ® Rochester J. LaClair Jules L. Smith SO ORDERED. T. Arnault*€ Donald D. Oliver bklawyers olan J. Lafler May 3, ( p L W VIA ELECTRONIC dekornfeld@bkif Philip M. Halpern Also admitted in MA : oa wD FILING AND United States District Judge LAR: Meh Dated: White Plains, New York May 3, 2023 The Honorable Philip M. Halpern United States District Court Judge Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse 300 Quarropas Street, Courtroom 520 White Plains, New York 10601-4150 Re: Teamsters Local 456 Pension Fund, et al. v. PCI Industries Corp., et al., Civil Action No.: 7:21-cv-09316 (PMH/JCM) Dear Judge Halpern: As you may recall, this firm represents Plaintiffs concerning the above referenced case before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. This letter requests a conference with the Court in accordance with the Order entered on March 1, 2023 [ Docket No. 52 ]. A copy of the Order is enclosed for your convenience. Since the hearing on February 28, 2032, the parties have tried to resolve the dispute concerning contributions and deductions owed to these multiemployer plans. When these efforts failed, the Funds requested that their auditors review the employer’s books and records to see if that could resolve the dispute. On April 4, 2023, the auditors issued the attached reports, and the Funds provided the reports to the employer on the same day. Since then, | have had telephone conferences and e-mail messages with counsel for Defendants, but we have been unable to resolve the dispute. Accordingly, the Funds commenced a second lawsuit concerning the contributions, deductions, and other amounts owed to Plaintiffs as described in the audit reports. With this letter, Plaintiffs request a conference with the Court to discuss the consolidation of the cases. Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides generally that the courts consider (i) the convenience and economy of the time relating to the parties or their witnesses, (ii) the convenience and economy of the Court, (iii) the possibility that by a determination of one issue the trial of other issues would be avoided, (iv) the degree of repetition that might be involved in determining the cases separately, (v) whether both cases would be determinable by a jury or whether one would be a matter solely within the cognizance of the Court, and (vi) whether the trying of the cases together would necessarily

{B0316425.1}

Blitmand Kine LLP May 3, 2023 Page 2 work prejudice against one or the other of the parties, which could not be avoided by proper instructions. See Larsen v. Powell, 16 F.R.D. 322, 323 (D. Colo. 1954), Pursuant to these standards, motions to consolidate should be granted to avoid repetitious actions and for the convenience of the parties and the Court absent prejudice to a party opposing the motion. See e.g., Hannah v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2015 U.S. DIST LEXIS 78306, *17 (D. Conn. June 17, 2015); Jenkins v. Gaylord Entm’t Co., 840 F. Supp. 2d 873, 884 (D. Md. 2012). Considering the facts and circumstances of both cases, the need to avoid duplicative proceedings, the convenience of the parties as well as the Court, and the absence of any prejudice to the other parties to the actions, Plaintiffs respectfully request a conference with the District Court to discuss the consolidation of these cases. Moreover, with this letter, | confirm that | conferred with counsel for Defendants on April 10, 19, and 27, 2023 about this request for about half an hour. Despite these conferences, the parties were unable to resolve the dispute. Accordingly, we respectfully request a telephone conference with the Court pursuant to the enclosed order. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Respectfully submitted, BLITMAN & KING LLP ee Vie Ki Daniel Kornfeld DEK/tss Encl. cc: Brenda Ritch, Fund Administrator (w/ encl.) Teamster Local 456 Funds 160 South Central Ave. Elmsford, New York 10523 Mr. Clifford Greene, Esq. (w/ encl.) 700 White Plains Post Road, Suite 309 Scarsdale, New York 10583

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

TEAMSTERS LOCAL 456 PENSION, HEALTH & WELFARE, ANNUITY, EDUCATION & TRAINING, INDUSTRY ADVANCEMENT, AND LEGAL SERVICES FUNDS by Louis A. Picani, Joseph Sansone, Dominick Cassanelli, Jr., Ross Pepe, and Jeffrey Isaacs as Trustees and ORDER fiduciaries of the Funds, and WESTCHESTER R TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 456, 21-CV-09316 (PMH) Plaintiffs, -against- PCI INDUSTRIES CORP. and ROBERT PERSICO, Individually, Defendants.

PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge: The Court held an in-person conference on February 28, 2023 regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of a Judgment by Confession (Doc. 45), as discussed in further detail on the record: 1. Plaintiffs represented to the Court that they are withdrawing their Motion for Entry of a Judgment by Confession. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion sequence pending at Doc. 45. 2, Plaintiffs shall not renew their Motion for Entry of a Judgment by Confession or otherwise seek relief or enforcement of the Order on the Stipulation of Conditional Discontinuance entered by this Court on August 29, 2022 (Doc. 36, hereafter, “Settlement Agreement”) without first meeting and conferring with Defendants’ counsel. Plaintiffs shall file a letter requesting a pre-motion conference before seeking any relief concerning or enforcement of the Settlement Agreement. Plaintiffs shall certify in their pre-motion conference letter that the parties have met

and conferred, identifying the date and amount of time spent. Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiffs’ pre-motion letter within three (3) days of any such letter being filed. 3. Plaintiffs may not seek relief concerning or the enforcement of the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement based upon the amount of any future contribution obligations of Defendants to Plaintiffs. SO ORDERED. Dated: White Plains, New York February 28, 2023 PHILIP M. HALPERN United States District Judge

WAGNER & ZWERMAN LLP fe A division of oH ACCOUNTING | TAX | CONSULTING GETTRYMARCUS

INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES Board of Trustees c/o Brenda Ritch Teamsters Local 456 Allied Benefit Funds □ 160 S Central Avenue Elmsford, NY 10523 Re: Payroll Compliance Examination: Employer Name: PCI Industries Corp. Employer No.: 31071, 31001 Examination No.; 23-456-01 Period: January 1, 2021 through February 26, 2023 We have performed the procedures enumerated, which were agreed to by the management of the Local 456 Benefit Funds (the “Funds”), solely to assist you with respect to determining whether employer contributions provided by the referenced employer (the “Employer’”) of Funds’ participants for the period referred to above were made in accordance with collective bargaining agreements. The management of the Funds is responsible for the collection of employer contributions. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report.

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

Related

Jenkins v. Gaylord Entertainment Co.
840 F. Supp. 2d 873 (D. Maryland, 2012)
Larsen v. Powell
16 F.R.D. 322 (D. Colorado, 1954)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Teamsters Local 456 Pension, Health & Welfare, Annuity, Education & Training, Industry Advancement, and Legal Services Funds v. PCI Industries Corp., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teamsters-local-456-pension-health-welfare-annuity-education-nysd-2023.