Johnson v. Charps Welding & Fabricating, Inc., No. 18-3007 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Trustees of three employee benefit funds filed suit against Charps and others, alleging that defendants breached collective bargaining agreements by not contributing to the employee benefit funds for work performed by the affiliates, in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The district court granted summary judgment to defendants, awarding them attorney's fees and costs.
The Eighth Circuit held that defendants did not owe contributions for the affiliates' work where the trustees have not shown a genuine issue that the defendant companies formed a relationship of alter ego, joint venture, or joint enterprise. Furthermore, the collective bargaining agreements did not require defendants to contribute for the work of Charps' affiliates. The court also held that the trustees did not meet their burden in opposing summary judgment on their claim that the district court failed to address Charps' liability for contributions based on its own employees' work, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying, as duplicative, the trustees' motion to compel production of the spreadsheets.
Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment in 18-3007, but reversed and remanded in 19-1206. On remand, the district court should award costs that are taxable under 28 U.S.C. 1821 and 1920. In regard to the nontaxable costs, the district court may determine whether they may be awarded as attorney's fees.
Court Description: [Benton, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge and Gruender, Circuit Judge] Civil case - ERISA. The plaintiff trustees of three employee benefit funds failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact that Charps's corporate affiliates served as its alter egos and were liable for unpaid pension fund contributions; nor did the trustees show that Charps entered into joint venture with its affiliates because it did not provide facts showing genuine issues as to the sharing of profits and mutual control; nor did the trustees show the companies formed a joint enterprise as the affiliates did not have a legal right to control Charps; the collective bargaining agreements between Charps and the unions did not require the defendants to contribute for the work of Charps's affiliates; the trustees did not meet their burden of proof in opposing Charps's motion for summary judgment regarding its liability for contributions for its own employees' work; the trustees' motion to compel production of certain payroll data spreadsheets was properly denied as duplicative; the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding defendants attorney's fees and the amount awarded was reasonable; the district court abused its discretion by awarding certain costs not taxable under 28 U.S.C. Section 1920 and the matter is remanded for a recalculation of the costs.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.