Trustees of the Pipe Industry Health and Welfare Fund of Colorado et al v. Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Tenth Circuit Colorado District Court Trustees of the Pipe Industry Health and Welfare Fund of Colorado et al v. Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc.

Trustees of the Pipe Industry Health and Welfare Fund of Colorado et al v. Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Trustees of the Pipe Industry Health and Welfare Fund of Colorado, Trustees of the Denver Pipe Industry Vacation Fund, Denver Pipefitters Joint Apprenticeship and Training Fund, Contract Administration Fund of Northeastern Colorado and Plumbers Local Union No. 3, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada
Defendant:	Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc.
Case Number:	1:2009cv02505
Filed:	October 26, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the District of Colorado
Office:	Denver Office
County:	Denver
Presiding Judge:	Lewis T. Babcock
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	29 U.S.C. § 1145 E.R.I.S.A.
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 26, 2010	Filing 8 ORDER OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT. 7 Default judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2) against Defendant, Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc., doing business as Benjamin Franklin Plumbing of Northern Colorado, is entered. Total judgment of $17,478.07 in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant consisting of unpaid contributions to the Funds in the amount of $4,676.32 for the period 01/01/2006 through 12/31/2008; Interest on the unpaid contributions at the rate of two percent (2%) per mont h through 10/20/2009 in the amount of $3,908.48; Liquidated damages in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the unpaid contributions in the amount of $2,043.17, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2)(C); Late charges in the amount of $1,250.00; Audit fees in the sum of $2,509.45; Reasonable attorneys fees in the amount of $2,570.00; and Court costs in the amount of $520.65, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 04/26/2010.(wjc, )

Date Filed

Document Text

April 26, 2010

Filing 8 ORDER OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT. 7 Default judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2) against Defendant, Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc., doing business as Benjamin Franklin Plumbing of Northern Colorado, is entered. Total judgment of $17,478.07 in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant consisting of unpaid contributions to the Funds in the amount of $4,676.32 for the period 01/01/2006 through 12/31/2008; Interest on the unpaid contributions at the rate of two percent (2%) per mont h through 10/20/2009 in the amount of $3,908.48; Liquidated damages in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the unpaid contributions in the amount of $2,043.17, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2)(C); Late charges in the amount of $1,250.00; Audit fees in the sum of $2,509.45; Reasonable attorneys fees in the amount of $2,570.00; and Court costs in the amount of $520.65, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 04/26/2010.(wjc, )

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Trustees of the Pipe Industry Health and Welfare Fund of Colorado et al v. Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Trustees of the Pipe Industry Health and Welfare Fund of Colorado
Represented By:	Martin D. Buckley
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Trustees of the Denver Pipe Industry Vacation Fund
Represented By:	Martin D. Buckley
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Denver Pipefitters Joint Apprenticeship and Training Fund
Represented By:	Martin D. Buckley
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Contract Administration Fund of Northeastern Colorado
Represented By:	Martin D. Buckley
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Plumbers Local Union No. 3, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada
Represented By:	Martin D. Buckley
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Mountain Mechanical Engineers, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?