United Brotherhood of Carpenters Joiners v. Tile Helpers Union Local 88

803 F. Supp. 601, 144 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2560, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15624
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York
DecidedSeptember 25, 1992
DocketCV 89-3290
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 803 F. Supp. 601 (United Brotherhood of Carpenters Joiners v. Tile Helpers Union Local 88) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United Brotherhood of Carpenters Joiners v. Tile Helpers Union Local 88, 803 F. Supp. 601, 144 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2560, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15624 (E.D.N.Y. 1992).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

NICKERSON, District Judge:

This action concerns the disaffiliation of the members of a local union from its pre *603 vious parent, the Tile, Marble, Terrazzo, Finishers, Shopworkers and Granite • Cutters International Union (AFL-CIO) (the “TMT International”). After the members of Tile Finishers Union Local No 88 (herein called “old Local 88”) disaffiliated from the TMT International and became members of the International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen (the “Bricklayers”), the “TMT International” merged into plaintiff United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of American (AFL-CIO) (the “Carpenters”).

The defendants are the'new local affiliated with the Bricklayers, now called Tile Helpers Union Local 88 (herein called “new Local 88”), as well as a Mortuary Fund, and former officers of old Local 88 now trustees of the Fund.

The Carpenters seek, in substance, to recover from defendants damages because of the transfer by old Local 88 of assets, plaintiffs say it was obligated to turn over to the TMT International under the terms of its constitution.

Jurisdiction is based on Section 301(a) of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185(a); Section 501(b) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 501; and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337.

By Memorandum and Order dated June 26,1990, familiarity with which is assumed, this court held that the Carpenters, as successor to TMT International, had standing to bring this action.

Both sides now ask for summary judgment. The chief issue is whether old Local 88 properly transferred into a mortuary account assets that the Carpenters say should have been forfeited to the TMT International.

I.

Most of the critical facts are not in serious dispute.

In 1987 the members of a number of the larger locals of TMT International, including old Local 88, having become dissatisfied with their parent, decided to leave and join the Bricklayers. See e.g., Tile, Marble, Terrazzo, et al. v. Local 32, 896 F.2d 1404 (3d Cir.1990) (Philadelphia and Harrisburg Local); Tile, Marble, Terrazzo, et al. v. Ceramic Tile Finishers Union, Local 25, 972 F.2d 738 (7th Cir.1992) (Chicago Local).

On September 10, 1987, the Executive Board of old Local 88 unanimously recommended to its members that they leave TMT International and join the Bricklayers and that Local 88 establish a mortuary account as soon as practicable in an amount not to exceed one hundred percent of the local’s assets. The business manager of Local 88 then established a mortuary fund on October 6, 1987.

Some time following September 1.0, 1987 the President and Business Manager of Local 88 sent a special notice to its entire membership stating, among other things, that it was of the utmost importance that all members attend the October 7, 1987 regular monthly meeting. On that date 169 out of 243 active members attended the meeting and unanimously adopted a resolution authorizing the creation of a death benefit or mortuary account in an amount not to exceed 100% of the local’s assets and appointing a Committee to oversee the account. The members then voted unanimously to leave the TMT International and join the Bricklayers.

The members at the meeting, followed by others in the succeeding weeks, also signed the Bricklayers’ membership applications. Members of old Local 88 stopped paying dues to the Local and to TMT International. On October 8,1987 the Bricklayers issued a charter for a local union, now new Local 88.

Pursuant to the resolution to establish a mortuary account, the Committee developed the terms of a death benefit plan, executed a Declaration of Trust that established an ERISA trust fund, adopted rules governing the plan, obtained an Employer Identification Number, and filed for and *604 obtained tax exempt status for the fund as a death benefit trust from the Internal Revenue Service. Out of funds remaining in old Local 88’s account, the Committee paid to TMT International the September 1987 “per capita” payment due from its constituent Locals.

In May 1988 the TMT International named plaintiff Frank Fiano as a Trustee over old Local 88, which by then had no members.

On April 2, 1991 Fiano as Trustee and the Carpenters, as the successor international union to the TMT International, filed an amended complaint alleging that (a) old Local 88’s dissolution and disaffiliation and its retention and transfer of assets violated the TMT International Constitution; (b) the defendants failed to abide by the terms imposed by the trusteeship; (c) the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duty under federal and state law; (d) the defendants converted old Local 88’s assets; and (e) the defendants interfered with old Local 88’s contractual relationships, including the TMT International constitution.

Plaintiffs’ amended complaint seeks (1) a declaratory judgment establishing the validity of the trusteeship; (2) an injunction enforcing its terms; (3) the transfer of old Local 88’s assets to plaintiffs; (4) compensatory damages in the amount of the money taken from old Local 88; (5) punitive damages; and (6) costs and fees.

II.

Pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants move for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and plaintiffs cross-move for partial summary judgment as to their claim for old Local 88’s assets, which they say include money held in the mortuary account, money used to pay for a car and to lease an office for the Local 88, and old Local 88’s books and records.

There are two main issues before the court: (a) whether plaintiffs properly established the trusteeship and (b) whether the defendants properly used the assets of old Local 88 for a mortuary account and for a few other subsidiary purposes.

(a) Trusteeship

The parties agree that TMT International appointed a trustee for old Local 88 after all of the members had resigned from the Local. Plaintiffs do not challenge the method or validity of these resignations.

After all the members resigned from old Local 88 it ceased to exist. Thus there was no longer a subordinate body for which to appoint a trusteeship. Tile, Marble, Terrazzo, et al. v. Local 32, supra, 896 F.2d at 1411-14.

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

Related

Masino v. Falzone
380 F. App'x 106 (Second Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
803 F. Supp. 601, 144 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2560, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-brotherhood-of-carpenters-joiners-v-tile-helpers-union-local-88-nyed-1992.