Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01319/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01319-13/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

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRUDY G. HEMPHILL, )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

)

PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF )

THE ESTATE OF JAMES J. )

RYSKAMP, JR., et al. )

)

)

Defendants. )

)

)

No. CV-F-05-1319 OWW/SMS

ORDER MODIFYING MEMORANDUM

DECISION GRANTING

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY ADJUDICATION 

The Memorandum Decision Granting Plaintiff's Motion for

Summary Adjudication filed on March 21, 2008 (Doc. 89) is hereby

modified nunc pro tunc.

Plaintiff sought an award of statutory penalties in the

amount of $125,180.00. The Court intended, in the exercise of

its discretion, to substantially reduce the award of statutory

penalties for the reasons stated at page 43 of the Memorandum

Decision. The Court inadvertently used an incorrect starting

date, June 6, 1996, for the determination of the penalties. The

Case 1:05-cv-01319-OWW -SMS Document 92 Filed 04/08/08 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

2

Court intended the start date for the calculation of statutory

penalties to be September 3, 2003 and the end date to be

September 25, 2005. By the Court’s calculation, this

modification results in an award of statutory penalties in the

amount of $37,650.00 (753 days x $50.00 per day). 

ACCORDINGLY, the Memorandum Decision Granting Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment is modified nunc pro tunc by deleting

pages 43:14-44:3 and substituting:

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of

statutory penalties against the Plan

administrator. Plaintiff has been attempting

since 1994 to obtain plan documents and

information. Plaintiff has had to hire

counsel and file a lawsuit to obtain her

ERISA rights and benefits. However, some

documents were provided. Further,

Plaintiff’s requests for plan documents and

information were made at widely spaced

intervals and not followed up with diligence

when no response or limited response was

made. The death of Dr. Ryskamp on September

25, 2005 is also a factor negating an award

of statutory penalties in the amount sought

by Plaintiff because, at his death,

compliance with Plaintiff’s demands and ERISA

rights became tied up in the courts. In the

exercise of discretion, statutory penalties

in the amount of $50.00 per day from

September 3, 2003 to September 25, 2005 is

awarded. Plaintiff’s motion for summary

adjudication is GRANTED to this extent. 

In all other respects, the Memorandum Decision Granting

Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Adjudication remains unchanged.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 8, 2008 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01319-OWW -SMS Document 92 Filed 04/08/08 Page 2 of 2