JAMES v. INTERNATIONAL PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES INDUSTRY PENSION PLAN Leagle.com
JAMES v. INTERNATIONAL PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES INDUSTRY PENSION PLAN
IAN PHILLIP JAMES, Plaintiff,
v.
INTERNATIONAL PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES INDUSTRY PENSION PLAN, and GARY J. MEYERS, Administrator International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Plan, Defendants.
Civil Action No. 07-2107 (RBW).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
April 30, 2010.
MEMORANDUM OPINIONREGGIE B. WALTON, District Judge.
Ian Phillip James, the plaintiff in this civil case, is seeking "compensatory damages for past benefits that have been improperly denied to him," Third Amended Complaint ("Compl.") ¶ 23, and a "declaratory judgment as to the amount of retirement benefits, both past and future, to which he is entitled to under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001-1461 (2000) (the "ERISA"), id. ¶ 25. Additionally, the plaintiff alleges that defendants International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Plan and its administrator, Gary J. Meyers, violated 29 U.S.C. § 1140 by retaliating against one of the plaintiff's prospective witnesses, id. ¶ 28-29, and "fail[ing] to supply . . . requested records, explanation and information," id. ¶ 42, and that the defendants breach the contract that governs the retirement benefits that are disputed in this case, id. ¶ 44. Currently before the Court are the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. After carefully considering the Complaint, the parties' summary judgment motions, and all memoranda of law and exhibits submitted with these filings,