Trustees of the Electrical Welfare Trust Fund v. Third Generation Electric, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, D. Maryland
DecidedJanuary 11, 2021
Docket8:18-cv-00051
StatusUnknown

This text of Trustees of the Electrical Welfare Trust Fund v. Third Generation Electric, LLC (Trustees of the Electrical Welfare Trust Fund v. Third Generation Electric, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Trustees of the Electrical Welfare Trust Fund v. Third Generation Electric, LLC, (D. Md. 2021).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

* TRUSTEES OF THE ELECTRICAL WELFARE TRUST FUND, et al., *

Plaintiffs, *

v. * Civil Action No. PX-18-0051

* THIRD GENERATION ELECTRIC, LLC, * Defendant. * ****** MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

The Electrical Welfare Trust Fund (“Welfare Fund”); the Electrical Workers Local No. 26 (“Local 26”) Pension Trust Fund (“Pension Fund”); the Local No. 26 Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust Fund (“Apprenticeship Fund”); the Local No. 26 Individual Account Fund (“Individual Account Fund”); the National Electrical Benefit Fund (“NEBF”) (collectively the “Funds”); the National Electrical Contractors Association, Washington D.C. Chapter (“NECA”); the National and Local Labor Management Cooperation Committees (“NLMCC” and “LMCC”); and their respective trustees and collection agents (collectively with the Funds, the “Plaintiffs”), bring this action against Defendant Third Generation Electric, LLC (“Third Generation”) under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. (1982), and Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1948 (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 185. Now pending before this Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment. ECF No. 46. Defendant Third Generation has not filed a response, and the time for doing so has passed. See Loc. R. 105.2.a. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment is GRANTED. I. Background The Funds are multi-employer plans as that term is defined under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(3). See ECF No. 16 ¶ 4. They were established and are maintained as the result of collective bargaining pursuant to Section 302(c)(5) and (6) of the LMRA, 29 U.S.C. § 186(c)(5)

and (6). Id. ¶ 2. Plaintiff Local 26 is a local union of electrical workers covering Washington, D.C., and parts of Maryland and Virginia. ECF No. 46-1 ¶ 2. Plaintiffs NLMCC and LLMCC were established pursuant to the Labor Management Cooperation Act of 1978 to improve the relationship between signatory employers and IBEW local unions. Id. ¶ 3. NECA is a national trade association that serves as a collective bargaining representative for electrical contractors such as Defendant Third Generation, a Maryland limited liability corporation and an employer within the meaning of LMRA, 29 U.S.C. § 152(2), and ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(5). ECF No. 16 ¶ 4. As a signatory to a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) with Local 26 and NECA, Third Generation was bound to the terms and conditions of the Agreements and Declarations of

Trust (“Trust Agreements”) establishing the Funds. Id. ¶¶ 6, 9-10; ECF No. 46-1 ¶ 5; ECF No. 46-4 at 9. Per the terms of the CBA and Trust Agreements, Third Generation agreed to make monthly contributions to the Plaintiff Funds, NECA,1 NLMCC, and LLMCC at specified rates,2 and to provide Plaintiffs with monthly contribution reports listing the name of each person employed pursuant to the CBA and the number of compensable hours of wages paid to each such person during that month. ECF No. 16 ¶¶ 10-11; ECF No. 46-4 at 38-39, 43-50. The Trust

1 Third Generation’s contribution obligation to NECA under the CBA is described in Article XI as contributions due to the “Industry Fund.” ECF No. 46-1 at 4 n.2; ECF No. 46-4 at 45.

2 The Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Individual Account Fund and Apprentice Fund have each adopted an interest rate on all delinquent contributions at the rate of 0.019% per day. ECF No. 46-1 ¶ 8. The NEBF has adopted an interest rate of 10% per annum. Id. Agreements also authorized Plaintiff Trustees to inspect and audit Third Generation’s payroll records to ensure Third Generation adhered to its contractual obligations. ECF No. 16 ¶ 12; ECF No. 46-4 ¶ 18. For any delinquent payments, Third Generation agreed to pay interest, calculated from the due date of each delinquent contribution to the date it was actually paid; liquidated

damages, assessed in an amount equal to the greater of 20% of each delinquent monthly contribution or $50.00 per month; and any attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by the Trustees in collecting delinquent contributions. ECF No. 16 ¶ 11; see also ECF No. 46-4 at 58, 75-77, 105- 08, 136-39, 173-77, 222-23. After conducting payroll audits for 2016, 2017, and 2018, Plaintiffs’ auditor determined that Third Generation had failed to properly report and pay contributions totaling $350,779.37, specifically: $179,455.36 owed to the Welfare Fund, $87,658.45 owed to the Pension Fund, $16,497 owed to the Apprenticeship Fund, $64,526.15 owed to the Individual Account Fund, $240 owed to the LLMCC, and $2,401.58 owed to NECA. ECF No. 16 ¶ 12; ECF No. 46-4 ¶ 19; id. at 229. Plaintiffs also claim that Third Generation failed to submit timely contribution

payments totaling $7,758.09 for work performed during the months of August, September and October 2017. ECF No. 16 ¶ 13; ECF No. 46-1 ¶ 9. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have brought suit against Third Generation under sections 502(g)(2) and 515 of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132(g)(2) and 1145, and section 301(a) of LMRA, 29 U.S.C. § 185(a), in an effort to collect the delinquent contributions, audit amounts, interest, liquidated damages owed, and attorney’s fees and costs. ECF No. 16. Third Generation ceased participating in this lawsuit as of August 2019, prompting the Clerk’s Office to enter default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) on Mach 9, 2020. ECF No. 44. On April 15, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the pending motion for default judgment. ECF No. 46. II. Discussion Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 governs default judgments which must be entered “[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a).

The Court may enter default judgment at the plaintiff’s request and with notice to the defaulting party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). Although courts maintain “a strong policy that cases be decided on the merits,” United States v. Schaffer Equip. Co., 11 F.3d 450, 453 (4th Cir. 1993), the Court may exercise its discretion in granting default judgment when the “adversary process has been halted because of an essentially unresponsive party.” S.E.C. v. Lawbaugh, 359 F. Supp. 2d 418, 421 (D. Md. 2005). When considering whether to grant default judgment, the Court takes as true all well- pleaded factual allegations in the complaint, other than those pertaining to damages. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Trustees of the Electrical Welfare Trust Fund v. Third Generation Electric, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trustees-of-the-electrical-welfare-trust-fund-v-third-generation-electric-mdd-2021.