Cotter v. Boston Builders, Inc.

Deborah 	Cotter,
United 	States 	District Court
District 	of Massachusetts
Plaintiff,
v.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil 	Action No.
25-12037-NMG
Boston 	Builders, 	Inc.,
Defendant.
)
)
---------------- ------
MEMORANDUM 	& ORDER
GORTON, 	J.
This 	action 	is 	brought 	by 	plaintiff 	Deborah 	Cotter
(" plaintiff " ) 	against 	defendant 	Boston 	Builders , 	Inc .
(" defendant " ) 	to 	recover 	alleged 	delinquent 	payments . 	Pending
before 	the 	Court 	is 	a 	motion 	of 	plaintiff 	for 	default 	judgment .
For 	the 	reasons 	hat 	follow , 	plaintiff ' s 	motion 	will 	be 	allowed .
I. Facts
Plaintiff 	initiated 	thi s 	action 	in 	July 	2025 	on 	behalf 	of
herself 	and 	a 	union 	she 	represents . 	According 	to 	the 	complaint ,
plain 	iff 	is 	the 	Administrator 	of 	the 	Painters 	and 	Allied 	Trades
District 	Council 	No . 	35 	Trust 	Funds 	(collectively , 	" Plaintiff
Funds " ) , 	which 	are 	designated 	for 	employees 	under 	a 	collective
bargaining 	agreement 	(" the 	CBA " ) 	and 	three 	Trust 	Agreements
between 	union 	laborers 	and 	their 	employers .
1
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 1 of 7

Defendant 	is 	a 	Massachusetts 	corporation 	and 	is 	obligated ,
under 	the 	CBA 	and 	Trust 	Agreements , 	to 	make 	contributions 	to 	the
Plaintiff 	Funds 	for 	certain 	employees . 	It 	did 	not 	make 	timely
contributions 	to 	the 	Plaintiff 	Funds 	in 	June 	or 	July 	2025 , 	but
belatedly made 	contributions 	two 	months 	after 	each 	one 	was 	due .
Although 	defendant 	was 	served 	in 	July 	2025 , 	it 	di d 	not
answer 	or 	otherwise 	respond 	to 	plaintiff ' s 	complaint . 	As 	such ,
this 	Court 	entered 	a 	notice 	of 	default 	on 	October 	9 , 	2025 , 	which
was 	mailed 	to 	defendant 	on 	the 	same 	day . 	Now , 	plaintiff 	moves
for 	entry 	of 	default 	judgment 	against 	defendant 	and 	seeks
monetary 	damages .
II. 	Legal 	Standard
Under 	Fed . 	R . 	Civ . 	P . 	55 , 	a 	district 	court 	may 	enter 	a
default 	judgment 	where 	a 	defendant 	has 	failed 	to 	plead 	or
otherwise 	defend 	itself . 	A final 	entry 	of 	default 	judgment
requires 	a 	two-step 	process . 	First , 	the 	Clerk 	enters 	a 	notice
of 	default . 	Id . 	55(a) , 	after 	which 	the 	Court 	may 	enter 	default
judgment 	upon 	application 	of 	the 	plaintiff . 	Id . 	55(b) .
Once 	a 	notice 	of 	default 	judgment 	is 	entered 	under 	Rule
55(a) , 	the 	Court 	presumes 	that 	all 	well - pled 	factual 	allegations
in 	the 	complaint 	are 	true . 	See 	Sec . 	& Exch . 	Comm ' n 	v .
Tropikgadget 	FZE , 	146 	F . Supp . 3d 	270 , 	275 	(D . 	Mass . 	2015)
Nevertheless , 	a 	default 	judgment 	will 	not 	be 	entered 	unless 	1)
the 	Court 	has 	both 	personal 	and 	subject 	matter 	jurisdiction , 	2)
2
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 2 of 7

the 	allegations 	in 	the 	complaint 	state 	a 	cognizable 	claim 	of
liability 	against 	defendant 	and 	3) 	those 	allegations 	merit 	a n
award 	of 	damages . 	Groden 	v . 	Epstein , 	No . 	24 - CV - 10303 - ADB , 	2024
WL 	4519724 , 	at 	*1 	(D . 	Mass . 	Oct . 	17 , 	2024) ; 	Mantouvalos 	v .
Mantouvalos , 	319 	F . R . D. 	420 , 	421 	(D . 	Mass . 	2017) .
III. 	Analysis
a. Jurisdiction
Before 	granting 	default 	judgment , 	the 	Court 	has 	" an
affirmative 	du 	y " 	to 	ensure 	that 	it 	has 	jurisdiction 	" over 	both
the 	subject 	matter 	and 	the 	parties ." 	Groden , 	2024 	WL 	4519724 , 	at
*2 ; 	see 	also 	Hugel 	v . 	McNell , 	886 	F . 2d 	1 , 	3 	n . 3 	(1st 	Cir . 	1989) .
This 	Court 	has 	personal 	jurisdiction 	over 	defendant 	becau s e
it 	is 	incorporated 	and 	has 	a 	principal 	place 	of 	business 	in
Massachusetts . 	Daimler 	AG 	v . 	Bauman , 	571 	U. S . 	117 , 	118 	(20 1 4)
(" The 	paradigm 	all - purpose 	forums 	for 	general 	jurisdiction 	are 	a
corporation ' s 	place 	of 	incorporation 	and 	principal 	place 	of
business ." ) . 	Further , 	despite 	its 	failure 	to 	respond , 	defendant
received 	both 	service 	of 	process 	and 	notice 	of 	default .
This 	Court 	likewise 	has 	subject 	matter 	jurisdiction 	ove r
plaintiff ' s 	Employee 	Retirement 	Income 	Security 	Act 	(" ERI SA" )
claim because 	it 	presents 	a 	question 	of 	federal 	law 	over 	whi ch
district 	courts 	have 	original 	jurisdiction 	and 	plaintiff 	al l ege s
that 	she 	is 	a 	" 	iduciary " 	under 	the 	statute . 	See 	28 	U. S . C .
§1331; 	29 	U. S . C . 	§1132(e) (1) 	(" [T]he 	district 	courts 	of 	the
3
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 3 of 7

United 	States 	shal l 	have 	exclusive 	jurisdiction 	of 	civil 	actions
under 	this 	subchapter 	brought 	by 	.
beneficiary , 	[or] 	fiduciary
b. Liability
. 	a 	participant ,
• II )
The 	Court 	must 	also 	assess 	plaintiff ' s 	complaint 	and
determine 	whether 	it 	states 	a 	cause 	of 	action 	and 	establishes
defendant ' s 	liabi l ity . 	Groden , 	2024 	WL 	4519724 , 	at 	*2 . 	In 	so
doing , 	the 	Court 	must 	accept 	as 	true 	all 	we l l -p led 	factual
allegations . 	See 	Franco 	v . 	Selective 	Ins ., 	184 	F . 3d 	4 , 	9 	n . 3
(1st 	Cir . 	1999) .
Plaintiff 	here 	alleges 	a 	single 	claim 	for 	relief : 	defendant
violated 	29 	U. S . C . 	§1132(g) (2) , 	the 	CBA 	and 	the 	Trust 	Agreements
by 	being 	habitually 	late 	in 	its 	payment 	to 	the 	Plaintiff 	Funds ,
particularly 	for 	June 	and 	July 	2025 . 	To 	present 	a 	viable
delinquent 	contributions 	claim , 	a 	plaintiff 	must 	esta blish 	that
the 	defendant 	(1) 	is 	obligated 	to 	make 	contributions 	under 	a
collectiv e 	bargaining 	agreeme n t 	and 	(2) 	has 	failed 	to 	make 	such
contributions 	i n 	accordance 	with 	the 	terms 	and 	conditions 	of 	the
agreement . 	29 	U. S . C . 	§1145 ; 	see 	Rubenstein 	v . 	Tri - State 	Transp .,
646 	F . 	Supp . 	1 , 	2 	(D . 	Mass . 	1984) 	(granting 	summary 	judgment
against 	defendant 	who 	signed 	the 	CBA 	and 	did 	not 	make 	agreed
upon 	contributions) .
Here , 	plaintiff 	alleges 	that 	(1) 	defendant 	is 	an 	employer
under 	the 	CBA 	and 	Trusts 	Agreements 	and 	is 	therefore 	required 	to
4
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 4 of 7

make 	contributions 	to 	the 	Pl aintiffs 	Funds 	and 	(2) 	defendant
repeatedly 	violated 	the 	terms 	of 	the 	CBA 	by making 	contributions
after 	the 	agreed 	upon 	date 	each month . 	Plaintiff ' s 	complaint
thus 	offers 	su ff icient 	allegations 	to 	establish 	a 	cognizable
claim 	for 	relief . 	Rubenstein , 	646 	F . 	Supp . 	at 	2 ; 	Franco , 	184
F . 3d 	at 	9 	n . 3 .
c. Damages
Once 	the 	Cour t 	finds 	a 	cognizable 	claim , 	it 	must 	ascertain
what 	damages 	are 	warranted . 	Groden , 	2024 	WL 	4519724 , 	at 	*3 . 	In
calculating 	damages , 	the 	Court 	may 	conduct 	a 	hearing 	but 	is 	not
required 	to , 	especially 	where 	the 	facts 	al le ged 	adequately
establish 	the 	amount 	warranted 	by 	the 	defau l t 	judgment . 	In 	re
The 	Home 	Rests ., 	I nc ., 	285 	F . 3d 	111 , 	114-15 	(1st 	Cir . 	2002) ; 	see
also 	HMG 	Prop . 	Inve stors , 	In c . 	v . 	Parque 	Indus . 	Rio 	Canas , 	Inc .,
847 	F . 2d 	908 , 	919 	(1st 	Ci r . 	1988) 	(" [I]f 	arriving 	at 	the
judgment 	amount 	i nvo lve s 	nothing 	more 	than 	arithme 	ic , 	i . e . 	the
making 	of 	computat i ons 	wh ic h 	may 	be 	fi gured 	from 	the 	record , 	a
default 	judgment 	can 	be 	entered 	without 	a 	hearing 	of 	any
kind . " ) . 	A court 	may 	request 	additional 	affidavits 	from 	the
moving 	party 	to 	determine 	damages 	as 	a 	matter 	o f 	fact . 	In 	re 	The
Home 	Restaurants , 	In c ., 	285 	F . 3d 	111 , 	114 	(1st 	Cir . 	2002) .
Plainti ff 	requests 	damages 	in 	the 	form 	of 	(1) 	liquidated
damages 	pursuant 	to 	the 	CBA 	of 	$6 , 152 	(2) 	attorney ' s 	fees 	and
5
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 5 of 7

costs 	of 	$2 , 094 	and 	(3) 	inte rest 	for 	the 	delinquent
contributions 	of 	$1 , 504 , 	for 	a 	total 	of 	$9 , 750 .
Plaintiff 	has 	provided 	an 	affidavit 	certifying 	that 	the
total 	amount 	of 	delinquent 	contributions 	for 	June 	and 	July 	2025
was 	$30 , 760 , 	which 	is 	suf fici ent 	to 	establish 	that 	amount 	as
fact . 	In 	re 	T he 	Home 	Restaur ants , 	Inc ., 	285 	F . 3d 	at 	114 .
Plaintiff 	requests 	20 % of 	that 	principal 	amount , 	the 	maximum
allowed 	under 	the 	CBA . 	That 	request 	will 	be 	approved .
Plaintiff ' s 	attorney 	has 	provided 	an 	affidavit 	that , 	based
upon 	her 	firm ' s 	reasonable 	billing 	rate , 	her 	fees 	and 	additional
costs 	in 	the 	case 	come 	to 	a 	total 	of 	$2 , 094 .
also 	be 	appro ve d .
That 	amount 	will
While 	the 	CBA 	permits 	the 	collection 	o f 	inte rest 	on
delinquent 	contributions , 	plaintiff ' s 	motion 	and 	accompanying
affidavit 	fail 	to 	su fficient ly 	describe 	the 	delinquent 	payments
for 	the 	Court 	to 	accept 	the 	claim .
will 	therefore 	be 	den ied .
6
The 	request 	for 	interest
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 6 of 7

- 	• • I; It
ORDER
For 	the 	f oregoing 	reasons , 	plaintiff ' s 	motion 	for 	default
judgment 	(Docket 	no . 	9) 	is , 	with 	respect 	to 	liquidated 	damages
and 	attorney ' s 	fees , 	ALLOWED, 	but , 	with 	respect 	to 	interest ,
DENIED. 	Plaintiff , 	Deborah 	Cotter , 	is 	awarded 	damages 	in 	the
amount 	of 	$9 , 750.
So 	ordered.
Nathaniel 	M. Gor ~ n
Senior 	United 	States 	District 	Judge
Dated : 	March /6 , 	2026
7
Case 1:25-cv-12037-NMG Document 12 Filed 03/16/26 Page 7 of 7