Skip to main content

Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund v. Castle Hill Healthcare Providers

D.D.C.January 18, 2017No. Civil Action No. 2014-0334
Plaintiff WinCastle Hill Healthcare Providers, LLC$38,872.82 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge Amit P. Mehta
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The court granted the Pension Fund's summary judgment motion and awarded $38,872.82 in delinquent contributions, interest, liquidated damages, and PPA surcharges against the healthcare employer defendants. The court also granted the majority of the plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees.

What This Ruling Means

**Union Pension Fund Wins Against Healthcare Employer** This case involved Castle Hill Healthcare Providers, a healthcare company that failed to make required payments to a union pension fund. The Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund sued the company for not paying the contributions it owed to workers' retirement benefits as required under their contract. The court ruled entirely in favor of the pension fund. Castle Hill Healthcare was ordered to pay $38,872.82, which included the unpaid pension contributions plus interest, additional penalty fees, and charges under federal pension law. The court also required the company to pay most of the pension fund's attorney fees for having to take legal action. This ruling matters for workers because it shows that courts will enforce employers' obligations to pay into pension and benefit funds. When companies try to skip these payments, they can't simply walk away - they'll face serious financial consequences including penalties and legal costs. This helps protect workers' retirement security by ensuring employers can't shortchange pension contributions without facing real consequences. Workers in unionized workplaces can take confidence that their contractual benefits have legal protection.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.