Locals 302 and 612 of the International Union of Operating Engineers Construction Industry Health and Security Fund et al v. Ace Paving Co., Inc., No. 2:2011cv01257 - Document 14 (W.D. Wash. 2012)
Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER in favor of plaintiffs in net amt of $392,654.97 by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Locals 302 and 612 of the International Union of Operating Engi...Fund et al v. Ace Paving Co., Inc. Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 8 9 LOCALS 302 AND 612 OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY HEALTH AND SECURITY FUND, et al., 10 11 12 Case No. C11-1257RSL FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER Plaintiffs, v. ACE PAVING CO., INC., Defendant. 13 14 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On April 18, 2012, the Court 15 granted Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 4) but directed 16 them to supplement the record with evidence of their interest, fees, and costs. Having 17 reviewed the supplemental memorandum and exhibits subsequently filed (Dkt. # 13), 18 and relying on its previous ruling (Dkt. # 12), the Court finds that Plaintiffs have 19 provided sufficient evidence to support an award in the following amounts: 20 21 22 Delinquent contributions Dues Liquidated damages Pre-judgment interest Attorney’s Fees Costs $310,893.17 $ 21,163.32 $ 37,307.18 $ 21,665.40 $ 1,138.50 $ 487.40 23 24 The Court notes that while an award of fees is mandatory when a trustee prevails in an action to enforce and collect benefit fund contributions, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2), 25 26 FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER - 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 the Court must still review the reasonableness of the requested amount and “exclude 2 from the lodestar amount hours that are not reasonably expended because they are 3 ‘excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.’” Van Gerwen v. Guarantee Mut. Life 4 Co., 214 F.3d 1041, 1045 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 5 6 7 434 (1983)). Reviewing both the rates and the hours claimed in this matter (Dkt. # 13 at 6), the Court finds each to be reasonable based upon its knowledge of the local legal market and its experience in similar cases. See id. *** 8 For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court directs the Clerk of Court to enter 9 10 judgment against Defendant in Plaintiffs’ favor in a net amount of $392,654.97. Interest will continue to accrue at the designated rate until the judgment is satisfied. 11 12 DATED this 24th day of April, 2012. 13 A 14 Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER - 2
]]>
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.
