Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Board of Trustees of Construction Industry & Laborers Joint Pension Trust for Southern Nevada v. Dunlap

United States District Court, D. Nevada

December 18, 2019

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY AND LABORERS JOINT PENSION TRUST FOR SOUTHERN NEVADA; THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY AND LABORERS JOINT PENSION TRUST FOR SOUTHERN NEVADA, Plaintiffs,
v.
REGINALD DUNLAP, an individual, Defendant.

          Adam P. Segal, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6120 Christopher M. Humes, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12782 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs

          ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT ECF NO. 7

          Jennifer A. Dorsey, U.S. District Judge.

         Before the Court is the Plaintiffs', the Board of Trustees of the Construction Industry and Laborers Joint Pension Trust for Southern Nevada (the “Trustees”) and the Construction Industry and Laborers Joint Pension Trust for Southern Nevada (the “Plan”), Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Reginald Dunlap (“Dunlap”). Default having been entered against Defendant, the Court having reviewed the Plaintiffs' Motion, received oral argument at the November 25, 2019, Hearing, being fully advised, and good cause appearing, the Court now makes the following findings of facts and conclusions of law.

         I. Findings of Fact

         1. Plaintiffs are the Board of Trustees of the Construction Industry and Laborers Joint Pension Trust for Southern Nevada and the Construction Industry and Laborers Joint Pension Trust for Southern Nevada.

         2. The Board of Trustees is made up of fiduciaries of the Plan for purposes of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”).

         3. The Plan is an employee benefit plan as defined in ERISA.

         4. The Defendant Reginald Dunlap is an individual who is a resident of the State of Nevada.

         5. Dunlap was a Participant in the Plan accruing pension benefits to his account.

         6. Dunlap applied for payment of pension benefits from the Plan in December 2007.

         7. The Plan offers two types of default pension options: (1) a Single Life Annuity for unmarried participants; and (2) 50% Husband-and-Wife Pension for married participants.

         8. Dunlap elected the Single Life Annuity option which requires a spouse's consent when the participant is a married individual.

         9. In his application, Dunlap executed a certification under the penalty of perjury stating that he was not married at the time he submitted his application for pension benefits.

         10. Dunlap was not truthful on his application to the Plan, as he was married to Tammie Davis at the time Dunlap submitted his application for payment to the Plan.

         11. When Dunlap applied for pension benefits 2007, he had been married to Tammie Davis for approximately 9 years.

         12. Dunlap did not register his wife under his health plan to further conceal his marriage.

         13. Dunlap also reported that he was single to the Internal Revenue Service while he was actually married, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.