Betancourt

Betancourt v. Storke Housing Investors

Good Law
114 Cal. Rptr. 2d 551·94 Cal. App. 4th 709
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 10, 2002B145835California3,218 words

Opinion

Opinion

Plaintiff laborers, relying upon Civil Code [1] section 3110, filed a mechanics' lien against the property upon which they had performed construction work. They and their union claimed that not all of their wages have been paid and sued to foreclose on the lien. The defendant owners of the property demurred, asserting that because the amounts allegedly due the laborers are pension trust fund contributions for benefits, the matter is subject to federal preemption under ERISA. [2]

The trial court, relying on our Supreme Court's decision in Carpenters So. Cal. Admin. Corp. v. El Capitan Development Co. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1041 , 282 Cal.Rptr. 277 , 811 P.2d 296 (El Capitan ), sustained the demurrer without leave to amend and dismissed the action, finding that the state claim is preempted by ERISA.

R. Betancourt, together with other employees (laborers) and District Council No. 16 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada (Union), appeal from the judgment in favor of respondent property owners, Storke Housing Investors and BDC Storke Development (Storke).

Because decisions of the United…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.