Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. Woodlawn Community Development Corporation
1:09-cv-03983
N.D. Ill.Feb 23, 2012Background
- Trust Funds sued Woodlawn for fringe benefit mispayment under a collective bargaining agreement.
- Court granted summary judgment on liability but found a fact dispute on damages due to an audit's methodology.
- Audit assumed that any non-union subcontractor performing jurisdictional work rendered all their work jurisdictional during the period.
- Trust Funds moved to reconsider damages under Rule 60(b); Woodlawn argued the audit was presumptively reasonable under 29 U.S.C. § 1059 due to employer recordkeeping failures.
- Court denied reconsideration; set an evidentiary hearing for March 1, 2012 to determine damages with potential burden shift to Trust Funds if Woodlawn presents contrary evidence.
- Footnote clarifies that failing to address opposing arguments in summary judgment briefing is not excusable neglect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 60(b) relief for damages ruling | Trust Funds: relief appropriate due to audit soundness and lack of contrary evidence. | Woodlawn: extraordinary circumstances not shown; 60(b)(6) improper here. | Denied |
| Audit presumption of reasonableness given missing records | Audit should stand as basis for damages if reasonable inference supports extent. | Woodlawn challenged audit as guesswork; burden to show invalidity. | District court correctly found no genuine issue; damages issue remains for evidentiary hearing |
| Failure to address opposing argument in summary judgment | Trust Funds argued the point; Woodlawn pressed it in response. | Failure to respond is not excusable neglect; arguments should have been addressed. | Waiver noted; Rule 60(b) relief denied on this basis |
Key Cases Cited
- Laborers’ Pension Fund v. RES Envtl. Servs, Inc., 377 F.3d 735 (7th Cir. 2004) (burden shifting when employer lacks records; funds need not prove exact scope)
- Laborers’ Pension Fund v. A & C Envtl., Inc., 301 F.3d 768 (7th Cir. 2002) (rule relieves fund from precise allocation when no records exist)
- Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380 (U.S. 1993) (Rule 60(b) relief is extraordinary and requires exceptional circumstances)
- Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (U.S. 1946) (basis for damages estimates when employer records are incomplete)