SOFCO ERECTORS, INC. v. TRUSTEES OF THE OHIO OPERATING ENGINEERS PENSION FUND; OHIO OPERATING ENGINEERS PENSION FUND - Articles

All Content

SOFCO ERECTORS, INC. v. TRUSTEES OF THE OHIO OPERATING ENGINEERS PENSION FUND; OHIO OPERATING ENGINEERS PENSION FUND

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Sep 28, 2021

Head Comment: GRIFFIN delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Daniel J. Clark, VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Gary L. Greenberg, JACKSON LEWIS P.C., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Attorneys 3: ARGUED: Michael J. Prame, GROOM LAW GROUP, CHARTERED, Washington, D.C., Yaakov M. Roth, JONES DAY, Washington D.C., for Amici Curiae.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Daniel J. Clark, Allen S. Kinzer, Daniel E. Shuey, VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Gary L. Greenberg, Mark B. Gerano, JACKSON LEWIS P.C., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Attorneys 6: ON BRIEF: Michael J. Prame, GROOM LAW GROUP, CHARTERED, Washington, D.C., Yaakov M. Roth, JONES DAY, Washington D.C., Adam G. Unikowsky, JENNER & BLOCK LLP, Washington, D.C., Andrew M. Johnstone, US FOODS, INC., Rosemont, Illinois, Thomas W.H. Barlow, KOSTOPOULOS RODRIGUEZ, PLLC, Birmingham, Michigan, Gregory J. Ossi, FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP, Washington, D.C., Kathleen Keller, BREDHOFF & KAISER, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C., Ronald L. Mason, Aaron T. Tulencik, MASON LAW FIRM CO., LPA, Dublin, Ohio, Brendan Collins, GKG LAW, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae.

Judge(s): COOK, GRIFFIN, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. Sofco Erectors, Inc. terminated its collective bargaining agreement with a local union. The Ohio Operating Engineers Pension Fund then assessed almost a million dollars in withdrawal liability against Sofco under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Sofco challenged the assessment on several grounds in ERISA-mandated arbitration. The arbitrator upheld the assessment, but the district court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The Fund appealed, and Sofco cross-appealed. For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, VACATE in part, and REMAND for further proceedings.

Attachments: