The Annuity, Welfare and Apprenticeship Skill Improvement & Safety Funds of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 15, 15A, 15C & 15D, AFL-CIO v. Kelco Construction, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THE ANNUITY, WELFARE AND APPRENTICESHIP SKILL IMPROVEMENT & SAFETY FUNDS OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 15, 15A, 15C & 15D, AFL-CIO, BY THEIR Case No. 1:25-CV-4554 (FB) (JRC) TRUSTEES THOMAS A. CALLAHAN, JOHN McNAMARA, MICHAEL SALGO and WILLIAM TYSON, CENTRAL PENSION FUND OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERA TING ENGINEERS, BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JOSEPH SHELTON, and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 15, ISA, 15C & 15D, AFL- CIO BY ITS PRESIDENT & BUSINESS MANAGER THOMAS A. CALLAHAN,, Plaintiffs, -against- KELCO CONSTRUCTION, INC., Defendant. Appearances: For the Plaintiffs: JAMES MICHAEL STEINBERG Brady McGuire & Steinberg, PC 220 White Plains Road Suite 390 Tarrytown, NY 10591 BLOCK, Senior District Judge: The Annuity, Welfare and Apprenticeship Skill Improvement & Safety Funds of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 15, 15A, 15C & 15D, AFL-CIO, Central Pension Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers, and International Union of Operating Engineers Local 15, 15A, 15C & 15D, AFL-CIO (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) brought this suit under the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. and Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (“LMRA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 185 et seq. to compel KELCO CONSTRUCTION, INC., (“Defendant”) to remit payments to employee benefit funds as required by the parties’ collective bargaining agreement. Following negotiations, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, see ECF No. 23-1, requiring Defendant to pay contributions and interest totaling $83,253.31 spread over seven monthly payments. Although Defendant made the first payment, it has since failed to make any further payments. Plaintiffs are now before the Court seeking enforcement of the settlement agreement and the entry of judgement against Defendant. The Stipulation of Discontinuance entered by the Court on December 5, 2025, declared that Plaintiff’s retained their “right of enforcement of the separately entered into Settlement agreement.” ECF No. 21. In the event of Defendant’s default, the Settlement Agreement authorized Plaintiffs to apply to the Court for entry of a judgement in the amount of $83,253.31, plus attorneys’ fees of $2,500.00, liquidated damages of $7,563.01, and costs. Agreement, ¶ 4. As Defendant made one of eight payments, the total is reduced by that amount, and Plaintiffs request entry of a judgement in the amount of $81,827.99. See ECF No. 24. The party seeking to enforce a purported settlement agreement bears the burden of proving that a binding and enforceable agreement exists. See Benicorp Ins. v. Nat'l Med. Health Card Sys., Inc., 447 F. Supp. 2d 329, 335 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). “A district court may exercise its inherent power to protect the parties appearing before it, to preserve the integrity of an action, to maintain its ability to render a final judgment and to ensure the administration of justice.” Haitian Ctrs. Council, Inc. v. Sale, 817 F. Supp. 336, 337 (E.D.N.Y. 1993). Furthermore, “[the] Court has ‘a duty to enforce a settlement agreement which it has approved.’” United States v. United States Currency in the Sum of Six Hundred Sixty Thousand, Two Hundred Dollars, 423 F. Supp. 2d 14, 33 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (quoting Meetings & Expositions, Inc. v. Tandy Corp., 490 F.2d 714, 717 (2d Cir. 1974)). Here, there is no dispute that the parties entered into a valid settlement agreement and that Defendant has been in default of said Agreement’s terms for more than six months. As the Court has a duty to enforce the settlement agreement, and Defendant has failed to appear or contest the motion, Plaintiff’s motion is granted. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgement in the amount of $81,827.99 against Defendant KELCO CONSTRUCTION, Inc.. SO ORDERED. _/S/ Frederic Block___________ FREDERIC BLOCK Senior United States District Judge Brooklyn, New York June 12, 2026