Skip to main content

Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund v. Jersey City Healthcare Providers, LLC

D.D.C.February 13, 2019No. Civil Action No. 2017-1657
Plaintiff WinJersey City Healthcare Providers, LLC$34,383.66 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly
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 summary judgment for the pension fund, awarding $34,383.66 in damages for unpaid and underpaid pension contributions, interest, liquidated damages, and audit fees. The court also granted injunctive relief requiring the employer to comply with contribution requirements going forward.

What This Ruling Means

**Union Pension Fund vs. Healthcare Provider: Court Case Summary** This case involved a dispute between the Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund and Jersey City Healthcare Providers, LLC. The union's pension fund brought claims against the healthcare company, likely related to unpaid contributions or violations of employee benefit obligations. Employment law cases like this typically arise when employers fail to make required payments to union pension funds or violate agreements about worker benefits. Unfortunately, the specific outcome of this 2019 case is not available in the court records provided. Without knowing how the court ruled, it's unclear whether the pension fund succeeded in its claims against the healthcare provider or what remedies may have been ordered. **What This Means for Workers:** This type of case highlights the importance of union pension funds actively monitoring and enforcing employer obligations. When employers are contractually required to contribute to pension funds, these legal actions help protect workers' retirement security. Even though we don't know this case's outcome, it demonstrates that pension funds will pursue legal action when they believe employers haven't met their obligations to workers' retirement benefits.

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.