1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

BOARDS OF TRUSTEES OF OHIO

LABORERS’ FRINGE BENEFIT

PROGRAMS, 

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action 2:18-cv-023

Judge Michael H. Watson

Magistrate Judge Jolson

SPECIALTY CONTRACTING,

INC., et al.,

Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This is an action, initiated on January 9, 2018, for unpaid fringe benefit contributions, 

liquidated damages, and interest allegedly owed certain employee benefits plans pursuant to a 

collective bargaining agreement. (See Doc. 1). Plaintiffs, the trustees of four trust funds, assert 

claims under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132 and the LMRA, 29 U.S.C. § 185. (Id. at 1). Defendants

Jonathon Good and Specialty Contracting, Inc. were served with a summons and a copy of the 

Complaint by certified mail on January 9, 2018. (Doc. 2), but have failed to plead or otherwise 

defend this action. Plaintiffs applied to the Clerk for entry of default against Jonathon Good (Doc. 

8), and the clerk entered default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) as to Defendant Jonathon Good 

on March 23, 2018. (Doc. 10). Plaintiffs applied to the Clerk for entry of default against Defendant 

Specialty Contracting, Inc. (Doc. 25), and the Clerk entered default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

55(a) on September 24, 2018 (Doc. 26). This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion 

for Default Judgment (Doc. 24), seeking default judgment against Defendant Specialty 

Contracting, Inc. 

Plaintiffs have established that Defendant entered into an agreement with a local union 
2

affiliated with the Laborers’ District Council of Ohio, AFL-CIO, by which Defendant agreed to 

pay contributions to the funds, by the 15th of each month, on behalf of its employees working 

within the work jurisdiction of the union. (Doc. 24-3, Ex. B). The affidavit of Plaintiffs’ 

Contractor Relations Manager (Doc. 24-2) establishes that Defendant owes $9,904.34 in unpaid 

fringe benefit contributions for the period October 2017 through December 2017. (Doc 24-3, Ex. 

C). Plaintiffs are entitled to liquidated damages, interest, and attorney fees on these unpaid 

contributions. 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2); Michigan Carpenters Council Health and Welfare Fund v. 

C.J. Rogers, Inc., 933 F.2d 376, 388–89 (6th Cir. 1991).

Plaintiffs seek an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $6,860.00, for 24.50 hours 

billed at the rate of $280.00 per hour. (Doc. 24-1, Ex. D). Plaintiffs have provided evidentiary 

support that the number of hours billed and the hourly rate charged are reasonable. 

Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to judgment in the amount of $9,904.34 in unpaid fringe 

benefit contributions, liquidated damages, and prejudgment interest, and an award of attorney’s 

fees in the amount of $6,860.00.

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 

24) be GRANTED. It is further RECOMMENDED that the Clerk enter judgment against 

Defendant Specialty Contracting, Inc., and that Plaintiffs Boards of Trustees of the Ohio Laborers’ 

Fringe Benefit Programs have and recover from Specialty Contracting Inc. the sum of Nine 

Thousand Nine Hundred Four Dollars and Thirty-Four Cents ($9,904.34), including unpaid fringe 

benefit contributions through December 2017, prejudgment interest, and liquidated damages, and 

a reasonable attorney’s fee in the amount of Six Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Dollars 

($6,860.00), plus interest from the date of judgment at the rate of one percent (1%) per month. 
3

Procedure on Objections

If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen 

(14) days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those specific 

proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with supporting 

authority for the objection(s). A Judge of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those 

portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is 

made. Upon proper objections, a Judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 

part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive further evidence or may recommit 

this matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and 

Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the District Judge review the Report 

and Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of 

the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 

(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: September 25, 2018 /s/ Kimberly A. Jolson

KIMBERLY A. JOLSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE