Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00328/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00328-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:185 Employee Pension Plan

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Jose Moreno and Larry Totten as

Trustees of the Laborers Health and

Welfare Trust Fund for Northern

California, et al,

 Plaintiffs,

 v.

Crutchfield Construction Co., Inc., a

California corporation, and Harold

D. Crutchfield, an individual, 

 Defendants.

_____________________________/

No. C-06-0328 WDB

SECOND ORDER FOR

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

The Court has received plaintiffs’ October 13th supplemental submission. 

In order to demonstrate that the EUCA is bound by the terms for liquidated

damages and interest promulgated by the Board of Trustees, plaintiffs must

respond to the following items.

1. If plaintiffs’ position is that they do not need amendments to the Trust

Agreements to be signed by EUCA, what is the source of authority for that

position and what is the evidence that EUCA would have known about that

authority?

Is there a writing that sets forth how the Trust Agreements to which EUCA

agreed to be bound could be amended? What is (are) the procedure(s) by which

the Trust Agreements could be amended? 

Case 3:06-cv-00328-JSW Document 31 Filed 10/18/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

At the time EUCA agreed to be bound by the Master Agreement (found at

Exhibit B of the Hagan Declaration) was EUCA aware of the writing and/or

procedures relating to how the Trust Agreements could be amended?

2. Plaintiffs have submitted an amendment to one of the Trust

Agreements that is signed by the representative for AGC. Hagan Decl., at Ex. D. 

Doesn’t the existence of an amendment signed by AGC imply that amendments

were to be signed by each signatory organization?

By Monday, October 23, 2006, at noon, plaintiffs must file with the Court

and serve on defendants plaintiffs’ argument and evidence relating to the above

items.

By Monday, October 30, 2006, at 4:00 p.m., defendants must file with the

Court and serve on plaintiffs defendants’ response, if any, to plaintiffs’ October

23rd submission.

On Monday, October 30, 2006, at 4:00 p.m., plaintiffs’ Motion for

Default Judgment will be DEEMED SUBMITTED.

The Court ORDERS plaintiffs to serve a copy of this Order on

defendants immediately.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2006

/s/ Wayne D. Brazil 

WAYNE D. BRAZIL

United States Magistrate Judge

Copies to: 

Plaintiffs with direction to serve defendants,

wdb, stats

Case 3:06-cv-00328-JSW Document 31 Filed 10/18/06 Page 2 of 2