International Painters, CBO Glass, Settle Labor Contract Case

The International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund (IPAT) has settled its suit filed last year against Alden, N.Y.-based CBO Glass, along with two companies affiliated with CBO, Seneca CBO Glass LLC And South Buffalo Glazing LLC, according to court documents filed in the case.

Details of the settlement have not been disclosed.

The suit, filed in March 2012, alleged that CBO had “failed to pay amounts due under the Labor Contracts, Trust Agreements and Plan.” An amended complaint was filed earlier this year describing the two other companies as “alter egos” of CBO and alleging that they were liable as well in the case.

IPAT alleged that the company agreed to make full and timely payments to the Funds and to file monthly remittance reports with the Funds, detailing all employees or work for which contributions were required under the labor contract. Further, the complaint alleged that in November 2011, CBO vice president and CFO Lawrence Gildersleve signed a promissory note agreeing that the companies owed the fund $319,650.42 and that the compan[ies] would pay a settlement sum of $266,747.63 in 12 consecutive monthly installments.

“Companies defaulted on the note by failing to submit the settlement installments and by failing to submit remittance reports and contributions for the period of December 2011 through February 2012,” wrote counsel for IPAT in the recent amended complaint.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, where the case was under review, had granted CBO, Seneca and South Buffalo Glazing an extension to respond to the complaint until May 20, but on May 14 the court filed a settlement order, noting that it had been “been advised by the parties that the above action has been settled, including all counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party claims, if any.”

“This action is hereby dismissed and each party is to bear its own costs unless otherwise agreed, in which event the costs shall be adjusted between the parties in accordance with their agreement,” wrote the court. “The entry of this order is without prejudice to the right of a party to move for good cause within 30 days to reopen this action if settlement is not consummated. If no party moves to reopen, the dismissal shall be with prejudice.”