Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-04599/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-04599-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1145 E.R.I.S.A.

---

______________________________________ 1

Stipulation for leave to file Third Party Complaint and for Staye 

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

Gregory J. Roberts, SBN 141516 

Barrus and Roberts, P.C. 

7111 N. Fresno Street, Suite 210 

Fresno, California 93720 

Telephone: 559-431-6800 

Facsimile: 559-354-1608 

Attorneys for Defendants 

 R. G. Construction and Rudy 

 Gonzalez 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

LARRY TOTTEN as CHAIRMAN and JOSE 

MORENO as CO-CHAIRMAN of the BOARD 

OF TRUSTEES FOR THE LABORERS 

HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND OF 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA; LABORERS 

VACATION-HOLIDAY TRUST FUND FOR 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA; LABORERS 

PENSION TRUST FUND FOR NORTHERN 

CALIFORNIA; and LABORERS TRAINING 

AND RETRAINING TRUST FUND FOR 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

R.G. CONSTRUCTION, a business entity; and 

RUDY E. GONZALEZ, an individual, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 3:02cv4599 JSW 

STIPULATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 

THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT, FOR STAY 

OF ACTION PENDING 

DETERMINATION OF THIRD PARTY 

COMPLAINT AND ORDER THEREON 

Court: Courtroom 17, 16th floor. 

Judge: Jeffrey S. White 

 The Parties to the above-entitled action hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

j

1. This is an action by trustees of multiemployer employee benefit plans to enforce, pursuant 

to § 515 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1145, the obligations 

of defendants under the terms of collective bargaining agreements and trust agreements to pay 

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 1 of 7 Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 1 of 7
______________________________________ 2

Stipulation for leave to file Third Party Complaint and for Staye 

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

employee benefit contributions to the plans and the rights of the plans to conduct an audit of 

defendants’ business records to determine the full amount of contributions due. 

2. In 1995 defendants executed two collective bargaining agreements with the Laborers 

Union, one for asbestos removal and one for lead paint removal. Plaintiffs are the third party 

beneficiaries of those contracts. 

3. Plaintiffs are suing defendants to compel an audit of Defendants records from 1995 to the 

present and to obtain a judgment for alleged unpaid contributions and related damages. 

4. Defendants deny any obligations to Plaintiff and have raised two legal defenses regarding 

the underlying contracts. First, defendants contend that the collective bargaining agreements were 

obtained by fraud in the inducement, i.e., by getting Mr. Gonzales drunk. Second, defendants contend 

that the collective bargaining agreements were terminated by notices to the Union at the end of 1997 

and again 2000. 

5. Plaintiffs contend that these two legal defenses are not valid defenses to this action and that 

Defendants must address these two defenses with the Laborers Union. The Laborers Union is not a 

Plaintiff or a party to this action. 

6. If the underlying contract was obtained by fraud or if the contract was terminated in 1997 

and again in 2000, Plaintiff’s action is either terminated or limited in scope. 

7. The parties agree that a determination of the validity of the underlying contract and/or its 

termination needs to be decided before the issue of this case can be properly and fully adjudicated. 

8. On May 9, 2005, the parties participated in a mandatory settlement conference with the 

court. Because of the problems with the underlying contract, the court thought it made sense and that 

good cause appeared for the stay of this action until the Labor Union could be brought into the action 

to adjudicate the issue regarding the termination of the contract. 

9. Wherefore the parties agree as follows: 

 A. That Defendants be allowed to file and serve a third party complaint against the 

Laborer’s Union for declaratory relief regarding the validity of the contracts and their termination. 

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 2 of 7 Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 2 of 7
______________________________________ 3

Stipulation for leave to file Third Party Complaint and for Staye 

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

 B. That this action be stayed until the adjudication of the third party complaint or 

further order of the court. 

DATED: June 10, 2005 STANTON, KAY & WATSON, LLP 

 By: ________________________________

Bruce K. Leigh 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DATED: June 10, 2005 BARRUS & ROBERTS, PC 

 By: ________________________________

Gregory J. Roberts 

Attorneys for Defendants 

ORDER

 Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

 A. That Defendants be allowed to file and serve a third party complaint (a copy of 

which is attached hereto as exhibit “A”) against the Laborer’s Union for declaratory relief regarding 

the validity of the contracts and their termination. 

 B. That this action be stayed until the adjudication of the third party complaint or 

further order of the court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED 

 By: ________________________________

Hon. Jeffrey S. White, Jude 

United States District Court 

(3868-002)

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 3 of 7

/s/ Jeffrey S. White

Dated: June 10, 2005 Judge

Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 3 of 7
______________________________________ 4

Exhibit “A” to Stipulation 

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

EXHIBIT “A” 

Gregory J. Roberts, SBN 141516 

Barrus and Roberts, P.C. 

7111 N. Fresno Street, Suite 210 

Fresno, California 93720 

Telephone: 559-431-6800 

Facsimile: 559-354-1608 

Attorneys for R.G. Construction 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

LARRY TOTTEN as CHAIRMAN and JOSE 

MORENO as CO-CHAIRMAN of the BOARD 

OF TRUSTEES FOR THE LABORERS 

HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND OF 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA; LABORERS 

VACATION-HOLIDAY TRUST FUND FOR 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA; LABORERS 

PENSION TRUST FUND FOR NORTHERN 

CALIFORNIA; and LABORERS TRAINING 

AND RETRAINING TRUST FUND FOR 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

R.G. CONSTRUCTION, a business entity; and 

RUDY E. GONZALEZ, an individual, 

_______________Defendants.______________

R.G. CONSTRUCTION, a California 

Corporation,

 Third party Complainant 

 v. 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA DISTRICT 

COUNCIL OF LABORERS, entity unknown, 

 Third Party Defendant 

Case No. 3:02cv4599 JSW 

 THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT FOR 

 DECLARATORY RELIEF 

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 4 of 7 Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 4 of 7
______________________________________ 5

Exhibit “A” to Stipulation 

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

 R. G. Construction alleges as follows: 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. The underlying action is an action by trustees of multiemployer employee benefit plans to 

enforce, pursuant to § 515 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 

1145, the obligations of defendants under the terms of collective bargaining agreements and trust 

agreements to pay employee benefit contributions to the plans and the rights of the plans to conduct an 

audit of defendants’ business records to determine the full amount of contributions due. This court 

has jurisdiction pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 185 and § 1132. 

2. Venue is established in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in 

that Third Party Defendant does business in this district and the contributions made by Defendant to 

Plaintiff were made in the Northern District 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e)(2).

PARTIES

3. Third Party Complainant, R.G. Construction is a California corporation, a licensed 

contractor doing business in California (hereinafter referred to as R. G. Construction). 

4. Third Party Defendant Northern California District Council of Laborers is affiliated with 

the Laborers International Union of North America, form of entity unknown, (hereinafter referred to 

as the “Union”.) R. G. Construction requests leave to amend this third party complaint when the 

correct name and identity of the Union is obtained. 

DECLARATORY RELIEF

5. Prior to March 23, 1995, the Union approached R. G. Construction about becoming a 

union contractor. R. G. Construction was not interested in becoming a Union Contractor. 

6. On March 23, 1995, in Oakland, California, Union representatives met with Rudy 

Gonzalez, the principal of R. G. Construction. They proceeded to get Mr. Gonzalez intoxicated and 

told Mr. Gonzalez of many benefits that he would enjoy as a Union contractor and of all of the jobs he 

would be able to get a Union Contractor. 

7. On March 23, 1995, Rudy Gonzalez, on behalf of R. G. Constructions, while intoxicated 

signed two different labor contracts with the Union. The first contract was a Laborers Asbestos 

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 5 of 7 Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 5 of 7
______________________________________ 6

Exhibit “A” to Stipulation 

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

Removal Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by 

reference. The second agreement was a Laborers Led Paint Removal Agreement, a copy of which is 

attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by reference. 

8. Both laborer contracts were set for a term through November of 1997, and allowed either 

party to terminate the contract. On November 25, 1997, R.G. Construction prepared and sent a 

contract expiration/termination letter to the Union. A copy of the letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 

and incorporated herein by reference. 

9. The Union has taken the position that the November 25, 1997 termination notice was not 

timely and that both contracts automatically renewed. 

10. On September 7, 2000, R. G. Construction hand delivered to the Union a second written 

notice of termination of both contracts. On September 28, 2000, R.G. Construction sent the Union, 

via certified mail, a third written notice of termination of both contracts. A copy of September 7, 

2000, hand served notice is attached as Exhibit 4 and incorporated herein by reference. A copy of the 

September 28, 2000, mailed notice is attached as Exhibit 5 and incorporated herein by reference. A 

copy of the signed Registered Receipt, reflecting the Unions receipt of the September 28, 2000, letter 

is enclosed as Exhibit 6 and incorporated herein by reference. 

11. The September 7, 2000 and the September 28, 2000 notice of termination letters, fell 

within the 30 day window for termination of the contracts as set forth in paragraph 20.1. of the 

contracts and property terminated the contracts. 

12. Defendants ceased doing work with Plaintiff and made no further contributions to the 

Union after the termination of the contracts. 

13. Subsequent to R. G. Construction’s termination of the contracts, The Union informed 

R. G. Construction that it could not terminate the contracts and that if R. G. Construction ceased doing 

business with the Union that it would be put out of business.

 14. Plaintiff then filed the underlying complaint against R. G. Construction seeking and audit 

of R.G. Constructions records and alleging unpaid contributions. Plaintiff also claims the contracts 

were not terminated. 

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 6 of 7 Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 6 of 7
______________________________________ 7

Exhibit “A” to Stipulation 

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

14. An actual controversy has arisen and now exits relating to the validity and termination of 

the contracts. R. G. Construction contends that the contracts are not valid because there were signed 

while Mr. Gonzalez was intoxicated. R. G. Construction further contends that if the contracts are 

valid, they were terminated in November of 1997 and again in September of 2000. The Union and 

Plaintiffs contend that the contracts are valid, that they were never terminated and that R. G. 

Construction must continue to submit to Plaintiffs’ audits and make contributions to Plaintiffs. 

15. R. G. Construction desires a judicial determination of the validity of the contracts and a 

declaration as to the termination of the contracts and the parties rights thereto. 

16. A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time and under the 

circumstances as Plaintiffs are seeking an audit and damages against R.G. Construction on contracts 

that are invalid and/or terminated. Plaintiffs’ action against R. G. Construction can not be adjudicated 

until a determination and declaration is made regarding the validity and termination of the contracts. 

 WHEREFOR, R.G. Construction prays judgment against the Union as follows: 

1. For a declaration that the contracts are invalid as they were signed while Rudy Gonzalez 

was intoxicated and/or that the contracts were terminated in November of 1997 and/or that the 

contracts were terminated in September of 2000. 

2. For attorneys fees. 

3. For costs of suit. 

4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper. 

DATED: June 10, 2005 BARRUS & ROBERTS, PC 

 By: ________________________________

Gregory J. Roberts 

Attorneys for R.G. Construction 

(3868-002)

Case 3:02-cv-04599 Document 43 Filed 06/10/2005 Page 7 of 7 Case 3:02-cv-04599-JSW Document 44 Filed 06/10/05 Page 7 of 7