UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund v. Jim Behm & Son Plumbing, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois
DecidedJuly 8, 2025
Docket1:24-cv-01116
StatusUnknown

This text of UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund v. Jim Behm & Son Plumbing, Inc. (UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund v. Jim Behm & Son Plumbing, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund v. Jim Behm & Son Plumbing, Inc., (C.D. Ill. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION

UA PLUMBERS 63 & STEAMFITTERS 353 JOINT

PENSION TRUST FUND, EAST CENTRAL ILLINOIS PIPE TRADES HEALTH & WELFARE FUND, Case No. 1:24-cv-01116-JEH-RLH PLUMBERS 63 EDUCATIONAL TRUST FUND, PLUMBERS LOCAL 63 ANNUITY BENEFIT PLAN, MID- ILLINI MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION INDUSTRY FUND, WEST CENTRAL BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL CHECK OFF, POLITICAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE FUND, TRI-COUNTY CONSTRUCTION LABOR- MANAGEMENT COUNCIL, PIPE TRADES DISTRICT COUNCIL #34, and UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF THE PLUMBING INDUSTRY OF THE UNTIED STATES AND CANADA LOCAL #63, Plaintiffs, v.

JIM BEHM & SON PLUMBING, INC. Defendant. Order This is an action for unpaid contributions pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (“ERISA”), and the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C. § 141 (“LMRA”). Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of Final Judgment. (D. 9). For the reasons stated, infra, the motion is granted. Plaintiff East Central Illinois Pipe Trades Health & Welfare Fund is awarded $62,672.70. Plaintiff UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund, and other plaintiffs for whom it acts as a collection agent, is awarded $74,039.44. I1 Plaintiffs are multi-employer plans, labor-management committees, and plans established pursuant to collective bargaining agreements between United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Page Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada (“Union”), certain employer associations whose employees are covered by the agreements with the Union, and labor organizations associated with the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada (“Local Union”). (D. 1 at ECF pp. 2–3). They provide “retirement and other benefits to the employees of participating employers who pay fringe benefit contributions to the Pension Fund on behalf of their employees[.]” (D. 1 at ECF p. 2). Two principal groups of plaintiffs seek collection: UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund, and other plaintiffs for whom it acts as

1 The facts related herein are taken from the Complaint, (D. 1), which the Court accepts as true by virtue of Defendant’s default. See Wehrs v. Wells, 688 F.3d 886, 892 (7th Cir. 2012).

2 a collection agent (“Trust Fund”) and East Central Illinois Pipe Trades Health & Welfare Fund (“Welfare Fund”). Defendant is a dissolved Illinois corporation with its principal place of business in Peoria, Illinois. (D. 1 at ECF p. 3). Defendant was bound by labor and trust agreements covering the period between May 1, 2021, and April 30, 2025. (D. 1 at ECF p. 4). Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the labor agreements, Defendant was required to make contributions to Plaintiffs, and to prepare and submit contribution reporting forms monthly. (D. 1 at ECF p. 5). Plaintiffs were also entitled to audit Defendant’s records. (D. 8 at ECF p. 3). On March 13, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint against Defendant Jim Behm & Son Plumbing, Inc., pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1000 et seq., and the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 141 et seq. (D. 1). Plaintiffs alleged an audit had revealed that Defendant continued to employ individuals who performed work covered under the agreements and failed to report and make contributions for such work. (D. 1 at ECF p. 6). Plaintiffs moved to compel an accounting to recover “unpaid fringe benefit contributions or other amounts determined to be owed.” (D. 1 at ECF p. 7). Plaintiffs seek unpaid fringe benefit contributions, union dues, interest and liquidated damages on both unpaid and late paid contributions, audit costs, court costs, and attorneys’ fees. (D. 10 at ECF p. 2). Defendant was served on April 3, 2024, but failed to plead or otherwise defend, so the Clerk entered a default on May 21. (D. 5). This Court granted Plaintiffs’ request for default judgment on October 8, 2024. (D. 8). The default judgment found Defendant liable for all allegations but made no entry of final judgment, instead directing Plaintiffs to provide a full accounting of all recoverable damages in a Motion for Entry of Final

3 Judgment. (D. 8 at ECF p. 7). Plaintiffs now seek entry of final judgment. (D. 9). Plaintiff UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund, and other plaintiffs for whom it acts as a collection agent, requests final judgment in the amount of $72,886.57. (D. 10 at ECF p. 11). Plaintiff East Central Illinois Pipe Trades Health & Welfare Fund requests final judgment in the amount of $61,412.44. Id. II A A court may enter judgment against a defaulted party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2). A default judgment establishes that a defendant is liable to a plaintiff on each cause of action alleged in a complaint. Dundee Cement Co. v. Howard Pipe & Concrete Prods., Inc., 722 F.2d 1319, 1323 (7th Cir. 1983); Breuer Elec. Mfg. Co. v. Toronado Sys. of Am., Inc., 687 F.2d 182, 186 (7th Cir. 1982). Upon default, the Court takes as true the well-pleaded allegations of a complaint related to liability, but the allegations regarding the amount of damages are not assumed to be accurate. e360 Insight v. The Spamhaus Project, 500 F.3d 594, 602 (7th Cir. 2007) (citing In re Catt, 368 F.3d 789, 793 (7th Cir. 2004)). The Court must conduct an inquiry to determine damages with reasonable certainty and must hold a hearing unless “the amount claimed is liquidated or capable of ascertainment from definite figures contained in the documentary evidence or in detailed affidavits.” Dundee Cement, 722 F.2d at 1323. The Court need not conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine damages if the amounts “are capable of easy computation.” Domanus v. Lewicki, 742 F.3d 290, 304 (7th Cir. 2014); 10A Charles Alan Wright, et al., Federal Practice & Procedure § 2688 (4th ed. 2020); FED. R. CIV. P. 55(b)). Furthermore, in accounting for damages, the Court is bound by the complaint as Federal Rule of

4 Civil Procedure 54(c) provides that “[a] default judgment must not differ in kind from, or exceed in amount, what is demanded in the pleadings.” B 1 This Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e)(1) and 29 U.S.C. § 185(a). Supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) exists over any remaining state-law claims.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
UA Plumbers 63 & Steamfitters 353 Joint Pension Trust Fund v. Jim Behm & Son Plumbing, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ua-plumbers-63-steamfitters-353-joint-pension-trust-fund-v-jim-behm-ilcd-2025.