Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06996/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06996-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BAY AREA PAINTERS AND TAPERS

PENSION TRUST FUND, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ALTA SPECIALTY CONTRACTING, INC.,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-06-6996 MJJ (JCS)

ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL BRIEFING 

Plaintiffs have filed a Motion for Default Judgment (“the Motion”), which was referred to the

undersigned Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation. A hearing on the Motion was

held on October 26, 2007, at which time the Court asked Plaintiffs to provide additional materials

and respond to specific questions relating to their entitlement to and calculation of damages. 

Plaintiffs filed a supplemental declaration on November 2, 2007 but failed to respond adequately to

a number of the Court’s questions. 

Accordingly, the Court requests responses, to be filed no later than November 30, 2007, to

the following questions:

1) Identify and provide to the Court the specific provisions of the Collective Bargaining

Agreement reflecting that the funds named in paragraph 12 of the Complaint are

entitled to fringe benefit contributions;

2) Explain the basis for the statement by Rose Cortez in her declaration that the rate of

$14.73 was an “incorrect rate” and that the “correct” rate for June and July 2006 was

$17.03 and for August 2006 was $17.78. Plaintiffs shall address in detail how the

rates that they assert are “correct” were derived and provide any relevant provisions

from the Collective Bargaining Agreement or trust agreements on which they rely.

3) The Court asked Plaintiffs to provide legal authority for the proposition that under

ERISA, a court may award interest not only on the unpaid contributions but also on

Case 3:06-cv-06996-MJJ Document 25 Filed 11/20/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

liquidated damages when provided for under the Collective Bargaining Agreement or

relevant trust agreement; Plaintiff failed to provide any such authority.

Failure to adequately respond to the Court’s questions will result in recommendation to the district

court that the Motion be denied in part or in its entirety. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 20, 2007

 

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-06996-MJJ Document 25 Filed 11/20/07 Page 2 of 2