Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Board of Trustees, Sheet Metal Workers' National Pension Fund v. Aidronic Test & Balance, Inc., 1:19cv88. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Virginia Number: infdco20190613899 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jun. 10, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 10, 2019
Summary: ORDER T.S. ELLIS, III , District Judge . On May 23, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson entered a Report and Recommendation ("Report") in this ERISA case, recommending that default judgment be entered on behalf of plaintiff. Upon consideration of the record and Judge Davis's Report, to which no objections have been filed, and having found no clear error, 1 The Court ADOPTS, as its own, the findings of fact and recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge, as
More

ORDER

On May 23, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson entered a Report and Recommendation ("Report") in this ERISA case, recommending that default judgment be entered on behalf of plaintiff.

Upon consideration of the record and Judge Davis's Report, to which no objections have been filed, and having found no clear error,1

The Court ADOPTS, as its own, the findings of fact and recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge, as set forth in the Report (Doc. 18).

Accordingly,

It is hereby ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion for default judgment (Dkt. 13) is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that defendant is DIRECTED to comply with plaintiffs' audit request and that defendant remit payment for any contributions and resulting interest and liquidated damages resulting from the audit of defendant's payroll records.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter Rule 58 judgment against defendant and in favor of plaintiffs in the amount of $22,293.75, which consists of $13,316.41 in delinquent contributions, $2,663.30 in liquidated damages, $708.37 in prejudgment interest, $134.91 in late fees, $4,796.59 in attorney's fees, and $647.17 in attorney's costs.

The Clerk is further directed to provide a copy of this Order to all counsel of record, and to place this matter among the ended causes.

FootNotes


1. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (in the absence of any objections to a magistrate's report, the court "need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must `only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'").
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer