Ray Haluch Gravel Company v. Central Pension Fund Of The International Union Of Operating Engineers And Participating Employers

571 U.S. 177 (2014)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D is a landscape supply company. Under a collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) with the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 98, D was required to pay contributions to union-affiliated benefit funds. In 2007, P commissioned an audit to determine whether D was meeting its obligations under the CBA. P demanded additional contributions. D refused to pay, and P filed a lawsuit. P also sought attorney’s and auditor’s fees and costs, under §502(g)(2)(D) of ERISA, P chose to submit their fee petition at the same time as their proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, but they later changed course. They requested an extension of time to file their “request for reimbursement of attorneys’ fees and costs in the above matter.” On April 4, P moved “for an order awarding the total attorneys’ fees and costs incurred . . . in attempting to collect this delinquency, in obtaining the audit, in protecting Plaintiffs’ interests, and in protecting the interests of the participants and beneficiaries.” P alleged that “[t]hose fees and costs . . . amount to $143,600.44,” and stated that “D is liable for these monies pursuant to” ERISA.' On June 17, 2011, the District Court issued a memorandum and order ruling that P was entitled to certain unpaid contributions, though less than had been requested. A judgment in favor of P in the amount of $26,897.41 was issued the same day. The District Court did not rule on P's motion for attorney’s fees and costs until July 25, 2011. On that date, it awarded $18,000 in attorney’s fees, plus costs of $16,688.15, for a total award of $34,688.15. On August 15, 2011, P appealed from both decisions. D filed a cross-appeal a week later. D argued that there had been no timely appeal from the June 17 decision on the merits. P argued that there was no final decision until July 25, when the District Court rendered a decision on their request for attorney’s fees and costs. The court of appeals agreed with P and D appealed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.