Michigan Retiree Health Benefits Suit ERISA Preempted

September 20, 2005 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - A Michigan federal judge has ruled that retirees can't sue their former employer in state court over a program requiring only younger retirees to pay part of their health coverage costs under a retiree health plan.

US District Judge Paul Gadola of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempts the reverse discrimination suit filed by plaintiffs Cheryl Williams and Ellice Johnson against DTE Energy Co., BNA reported.

Gadola ruled that the lawsuit brought under Michigan’s Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act related to the ERISA-governed retiree plan. That’s why the claim must be filed under ERISA, the court said. Although the state discrimination claim did not refer to the plan, the retirees sought to apply the state discrimination law to the plan to recover benefits, the court said.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

Retired DTE Energy employees younger than 55 years of age paid 15% of the cost for health care, while those 55 and older didn’t pay any cost.

The case is Williams v. DTE Energy Co., E.D. Mich., No. 01-40328, 8/30/05.

ESOP Trustee Secretly Takes Over Company

September 19, 2005 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - The US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee found that an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) trustee breached his fiduciary duties under ERISA when he purchased all of the ESOP's stock and did not disclose his purchase.

According to BNA, Lawrence Scott was president of Memphis Equipment Co. (MEC) when, as the court said, he “orchestrated” a takeover of the company by getting a $2.3 million loan to purchase all of the company’s stock, which was held in the ESOP.  

The purchase occurred in January of 1999 and was disclosed in the ESOP’s annual report to the Department of Labor in August of 1999.   The court found that the purchase was not disclosed in the summary annual reports given to ESOP participants, according to BNA.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

Two other plan trustees, Max May and Billy Thompson, learned of the stock sale in late 2002, and sued Scott for improperly acting without the approval of MEC’s board of directors, breaching his fiduciary duties as a director and officer of the company, and wrongfully converting company funds.   BNA reports that, according to the court opinion, May and Thompson also alleged that Scott engaged in a prohibited transaction, breached his fiduciary duties, and failed to properly disclose information regarding the ESOP to plan participants.

In November of 2004, the district court rescinded Scott’s stock purchase.

In the recent opinion, the court also said that Scott caused losses to the plan when he used company assets for his own personal use.   BNA reports that t he court ordered Scott to repay $627,924 to MEC, and $455,721 of that amount constituted losses to the ESOP that resulted from Scott’s failure to disclose the transaction. In addition, the court agreed with May and Thompson that Scott should be required to forfeit his own personal interest in the ESOP as a way of repaying the $455,721 loss incurred by the ESOP.

The case is May v. Scott, W.D. Tenn., No. 03-2112 M1/P, 8/31/05.

«

 

You’re viewing the third of three free articles.

  This is your final free article. 

Subscribe to a free PW newsletter - get free online access!

 Don’t leave before subscribing! 

If you’re a subscriber, please login.

Close