Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-01506/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-01506-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Italian French Baking Company and as Italian French Baking Co.
Defendant
Northwest Administrators, Inc.
Plaintiff
Richard Pinocci
Defendant

Document Text:

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

NORTHWEST ADMINISTRATORS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD PINOCCI, an individual

doing business as ITALIAN FRENCH

BAKING COMPANY and as ITALIAN

FRENCH BAKING Co.,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C-07-1506 SC

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Northwest Administrators, Inc. ("Northwest" or

"Plaintiff"), administers the Western Conference of Teamsters

Pension Trust Fund ("Trust Fund"). Northwest alleges that

Defendant Richard Pinocci ("Defendant"), doing business as the

Italian French Baking Company and as Italian French Baking Co.,

entered into a collective bargaining agreement with Teamsters

Local Union No. 484, pursuant to which he was to make

contributions to the Trust Fund on behalf of covered employees. 

Northwest alleges that Pinocci failed to make the required

contributions for January 2007 through August 2007 in a timely

manner. Northwest seeks to recover the unpaid contributions and

liquidated damages, plus interest, as well as its attorney's fees

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 1 of 7
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

and costs. 

Northwest filed the Complaint on March 15, 2007. Compl.,

Docket No. 1. Pinocci was served on April 13, 2007. See Carroll

Decl., Ex. 7. Pinocci did not file a responsive pleading or Rule

12 motion, and to date, has not put in an appearance before the

Court. On May 16, 2007, Northwest moved for entry of default. 

See Docket No. 4. On May 18, 2007, the Clerk of the Court entered

default against Pinocci. See Docket No. 7.

Now before the Court is Northwest's Motion for Default

Judgment. For the reasons stated herein, the Court GRANTS

Northwest Default Judgment and AWARDS Northwest damages in the

amount $3343.63, interest of $137.16, attorney's fees of $720.00,

and costs in the amount of $500.00, for a total Judgment of

$4700.79.

II. BACKGROUND 

In October 2000, Defendant entered into a collective

bargaining agreement with twelve locals of the International

Brotherhood of Teamsters (the "Union"). See Pentz Decl., Ex. 1

("Union Agreement"). Pursuant to Section 18 of the Union

Agreement, Defendant was to make monthly contributions to the

Trust Fund for each employee. Id. at 11-12. Defendant and the

Union also executed an Employer-Union Pension Certification, which

established a perpetual obligation for Defendant to continue

making contributions to the Trust Fund, even after the expiration

of the Agreement, until either Defendant or the Union notified the

other of intent to cancel that obligation. See Pentz Decl., Ex.

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 2 of 7
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 3

2. The Union Agreement and the Employer-Union Certification bound

Defendant to the terms of the Western Conference of Teamsters

Pension Trust Fund Agreement & Declaration of Trust ("Trust

Agreement"). Pentz Decl., Ex. 3 ("Trust Agreement"). 

Under the terms of the Trust Agreement, Defendant was

required to make contributions every month, due no later than the

10th day of the following month. Id., Article IV § 1. Failure to

make timely contributions would result in delinquency, requiring

Defendant to pay, in addition to the delinquent contributions,

interest, liquidated damages, and any attorney's fees and court

costs incurred by the Trust Fund in connection with the

delinquency. Id., Article IV § 3(a),(b).

On February 12, 2007, the Trust Fund notified Defendant that

he was delinquent in making contributions. See Pentz Decl., Ex.

4. Defendant failed to make timely contributions for January

through August, 2007. See Andrade Decl., Exs. 5, 6. Defendant

eventually made all of the required contributions with the

exception of March 2007, for which his check bounced. See Ex. 5. 

Plaintiff now seeks to recover the required contribution for March

2007, as well as the liquidated damages, interest, and attorney's

fees and costs mandated by the Trust Agreement.

III. LEGAL STANDARD

After entry of default, the Court may enter a default

judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). Its decision whether to do

so, while "discretionary," Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089, 1092

(9th Cir. 1980), is guided by several factors.

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 3 of 7
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 4

As a preliminary matter, the Court must "assess the adequacy

of the service of process on the party against whom default is

requested." Bd. of Trs. of the N. Cal. Sheet Metal Workers v.

Peters, No. C-00-0395 VRW, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19065, at *2

(N.D. Cal. Jan. 2, 2001). 

If the Court determines that service was sufficient, it may

consider the following factors, if present, in its decision on the

merits of a motion for default judgment:

(1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, (2)

the merits of plaintiff's substantive claim, (3) the

sufficiency of the complaint, (4) the sum of money at

stake in the action, (5) the possibility of a dispute

concerning material facts, (6) whether the default was

due to excusable neglect, and (7) the strong policy

underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring

decisions on the merits.

Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986). "The

general rule of law is that upon default the factual allegations

of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages,

will be taken as true. Geddes v. United Fin. Group, 559 F.2d 557,

560 (9th Cir. 1977). Therefore, for the purposes of this Motion,

the Court accepts as true the facts as alleged in the Complaint. 

IV. DISCUSSION

A. Service of Process

Northwest properly served Pinocci with the Complaint and

Summons in this action on April 13, 2007. See Carroll Decl., Ex

7. The proof of service indicates that the documents were

delivered to Pinocci's business address and were accepted by a

competent individual over the age of 18 who was informed of the

general nature of the papers, and were also sent by mail six days

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 4 of 7
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

1

Rule 4(e)(1) allows for personal service "pursuant to the law

of the state in which the district court is located, or in which

service is effected, for the service of a summons upon the

defendant in an action brought in the courts of general

jurisdiction of the State." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). In

California, "a summons may be served by leaving a copy of the

summons and complaint during usual office hours in his or her

office . . . with the person who is apparently in charge thereof,

and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and complaint by

first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the

place where a copy of the summons and complaint were left." Cal.

Civ. Proc. Code § 415.20; see also Docket No. 3. 

5

later. Id. This service complies with Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 4(e).1

B. Merits of Motion

Accepting the allegations in the Complaint as true, as it

must, the Court finds that the Eitel factors favor default

judgment. 

The Plaintiff's substantive claim appears solid on the

merits, and is plead sufficiently in the Complaint. Section

502(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974

("ERISA") gives the participants and beneficiaries of an ERISAgoverned pension plan, such as the Trust Fund, a cause of action

in federal court where an employer violates the terms of the plan. 

See 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), (a)(3). Further, the National

Labor Relations Act of 1947 vests the district court with

jurisdiction over disputes between employers and labor

organizations. See 29 U.S.C. § 185(a). These statutes provide

Northwest the basis for bringing the suit in this Court. 

Northwest has further shown that, by failing to make timely

contributions to the Trust Fund, Defendant has violated the terms

of both the Union Agreement and the Trust Agreement. It is

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 5 of 7
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 6

unlikely that there can be a dispute over any of the factual

issues, as the documents showing the extent of the delinquency are

Defendant's own statements from the Trust Fund. See Andrade Decl.

¶ 3, Ex. 6. The amount of money at stake is relatively small,

which favors a default judgment. 

Defendant's default cannot be said to be the result of

excusable neglect. First, Defendant was properly served. 

Further, he has actual knowledge of the suit -- the parties have

been in contact since Plaintiff initiated this suit, as evidenced

by the fact that Defendant has paid some of the delinquent

contributions (without the required liquidated damages or

interest) during that time. See Andrade Decl., Ex. 5. While it

is preferable to decide cases on the merits whenever possible,

this preference is not dispositive. Where a party fails to defend

against a complaint, as Defendant has failed here, Rule 55

authorizes the Court to enter default judgment. Kloepping v.

Fireman's Fund, No. C 94-2684 TEH, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1786, at

*10 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 1996).

V. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff

Northwest Administrators, Inc., Default Judgment. The Court

hereby AWARDS Plaintiff $3343.63 in damages, $137.16 in interest,

$720.00 in attorney's fees, and $500.00 in costs, for a total

Judgment of $4700.79.

Default Judgment shall be and hereby is entered for Plaintiff

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 6 of 7
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 7

and against Defendant in the amount of $4700.79.

This Default Judgment represents the Court's final judgment

regarding Defendant's delinquent contributions from January to

August, 2007. It in no way affects or limits Plaintiff's right to

audit Defendant's records, as allowed by the Union Agreement and

the Trust Agreement, or to pursue any available remedies for past

or future delinquencies not addressed herein.

IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED.

Dated: November 15, 2007

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-01506-SC Document 22 Filed 11/15/07 Page 7 of 7