Opinion
22-CV-6492 (JMF)
09-02-2022
TRUSTEES OF THE NEW YORK CITY DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS PENSION FUND, WELFARE FUND, ANNUITY FUND, AND APPRENTICESHIP, JOURNEYMAN RETRAINING, EDUCATIONAL AND INDUSTRY FUND et al., Petitioners, v. NORTH EAST FOUNDATIONS LLC, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:
On August 1, 2022, Petitioners filed a Petition to Confirm Arbitration. ECF No. 1. On August 2, 2022, the Court set a briefing schedule for Petitioners' submission of any additional materials in support of the Petition, Respondent's opposition, and Petitioners' reply. ECF No. 7. Petitioners served Respondent with the Petition, supporting materials, and the briefing schedule. ECF No. 9. Pursuant to the briefing schedule, Respondent's opposition was due no later than August 26, 2022. ECF No. 7. To date, Respondent has neither responded to the petition nor otherwise sought relief from the Award.
The Court must treat the Petition, even though unopposed, “as akin to a motion for summary judgment based on the movant's submissions.” Trs. for Mason Tenders Dist. Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund & Training Program Fund v. Capstone Constr. Corp., 11-CV-1715 (JMF), 2013 WL 1703578, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 19, 2013) (discussing in depth the legal standards for resolving unopposed petitions to confirm arbitration awards). After reviewing the petition and the supporting materials, the Court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment as to all portions of the Award, see ECF No. 1-9 (the “Award”), as the Arbitrator's decision provides more than “a barely colorable justification for the outcome reached.” Id. at *3 (internal quotation marks omitted). Nor is there any justification under Section 10(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act for vacating the Award.
The Court also awards Petitioners' requested attorneys' fees and costs. See Int'l Chem. Workers Union (AFL-CIO), Local No. 227 v. BASF Wyandotte Corp., 774 F.2d 43, 47 (2d Cir. 1985) (“[W]hen a challenger refuses to abide by an arbitrator's decision without justification, attorney's fees and costs may properly be awarded.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Here, Petitioners have met their burden of proving the reasonableness and necessity of hours spent, rates charged, and litigation costs incurred. Finally, the Court grants Petitioners' request for prejudgment interest at a rate of 5.25%. See Award at 3; Waterside Ocean Navigant Co. v. Int'l Navigation Ltd., 737 F.2d 150, 154 (2d Cir. 1984) (adopting a “presumption in favor of prejudgment interest”).
Accordingly, the Court grants Petitioners' unopposed petition to confirm the entire Award. Petitioners are directed to re-file their Proposed Judgment, ECF No. 1-12, electronically using the ECF Filing Event “Proposed Judgment,” by no later than September 9, 2022. The Proposed Judgment should include a calculation of the prejudgment interest.
SO ORDERED.