Trustees of The Operating Engineers Pension Trust et al v. Smith-Emery Company
| Trustees of The Operating Engineers Pension Trust, Trustees of the Operating Engineers Health and Welfare Fund, Trustees of the Operating Engineers Vacation-Holiday Savigs Trust and Trustees of the Operating Engineers Training Trust |
| Smith-Emery Company |
| 2:2009cv01476 |
| March 2, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Western Division - Los Angeles Office |
| Los Angeles |
| Kenton |
| Snyder |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits |
| Defendant |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
412
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) - PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO ENFORCE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Filed June 3, 2019, Case No. 2:09-cv-01476, Dkt. 406 ); PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO ENFORCE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Filed June 3, 2019, Case No. 2:13-cv- 09545, Dkt. 192) by Judge Christina A. Snyder. In accordance with the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the Trustees' motions to enforce the MOU. The Court reserves ruling on the Trustees' request for sanctions until the conclusion of the audit that is the subject of these motions. IT IS SO ORDERED. (lom)
|
|
Filing
395
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: RE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT (Filed August 13, 2018, Case No. 2:09-cv-01476, 353 PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (Filed September 24, 2018, Case No. 2:09-cv-01476, Dkt. 356 DEFENDANT S MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT (Filed August 13, 2018, Case No. 2:13-cv-09545, Dkt. 140) PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (Filed September 24, 2018, Case No. 2:13-cv-09545, Dkt. 144).Defendants motions to vacate judgment are DENIED. Plaintiffs motions for sanctions are DENIED. (lc)
|
|
Filing
330
JUDGMENT by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court having granted plaintiffs' motion for entry of judgment against defendant, Smith-Emery Company, a California corporation 319 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiffs, Trustee s of the Operating Engineers Pension Trust, Trustees of the Operating Engineers Health and Welfare Fund, Trustees of the Operating Engineers Vacation-Holiday Savings Trust and Trustees of the Operating Engineers Training Trust shall recover from defe ndant Smith-Emery Company, a California corporation, the principal amount of $1,289,591.59 plus interest thereon at a rate of 5% per annum from the date of entry of this judgment. Defendant Smith-Emery Company is ordered to pay the foregoin g principal and interest in 120 consecutive monthly installments of $13,678.12 each, commencing on the date of entry of this judgment, and continuing until paid in full. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that notwithstanding entry of judgment, the Court shall retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the terms of the parties' settlement and this judgment. (gk)
|
|
Filing
304
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY PENDING STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court need not resolve whether the Ninth Circuit's holding acts as res judicata of the issues in the State Case because the parties have settled this action. Further proceedings here, if any, will turn upon whether or not either party breaches its obligations pursuant to the settlement agreement. Defendant does not argue that a ruling in the State Case would disturb the parties' agreement to settle this action. Accordingly, defendant's motion for a stay 297 is DENIED as moot. Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk)
|
|
Filing
301
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS)- PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT (Filed June 6, 2016, Case No. 2:09-cv-01476-CAS Dkt. 271) ; PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF SETTLEMENT AND ENTRY OF JUDGMENT (Filed December 12, 2016, Case No. 2:09-cv-01476-CAS Dkt. 289) ;PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT OFSETTLEMENT AND ENTRY OF JUDGMENT (Filed December12, 2016, Case No. 2:13-cv-09545-CAS Dkt. 73) by Judge Christina A. Snyder.Plaintiffs' motions for enforcement of settlement are GRANTED 289 . Plaintiffs shall prepare forms of judgment that provide for installment payments of the stipulated settlement amounts and plaintiffs are directed to hold the judgments in trust until further order of court. Plaintiffs shall also lodge with the co urt judgments dismissing the actions with prejudice and providing that notwithstanding the entry of the dismissal, the court shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the agreement contracted in the MOU.Plaintiffs' motion for judgment in the Second Action, 271 , is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. (lom)
|
|
Filing
186
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW signed by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court concludes that plaintiffs are entitled to unpaid contributions as set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law, as well as double prejudgment interes t on these unpaid contributions and attorneys' fees and costs related only to their successful claims. The parties shall address the issue of attorneys' fees for plaintiffs and potential attorneys' fees for defendant by way of post-judgment motions. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (gk)
|
|
Filing
129
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment 80 . The Court DENIES defendant's motion for summary judgment 79 in its entirety. Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk)
|
|
Filing
34
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Victor B. Kenton re Stipulation for Protective Order, 33 . (rp)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
