Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

09-3884 Pearson v. Voith Paper Rolls, Inc.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 25, 2011//

09-3884 Pearson v. Voith Paper Rolls, Inc.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 25, 2011//

Listen to this article

Employment
ERISA; estoppel

Where an employer only negligently miscalculated a severance package, the employee cannot assert estoppel, in the absence of evidence of intentional misrepresentation or reliance.

“Pearson first asserts that Booth feared that Pearson would leverage his potential age discrimination claim to negotiate a more favorable severance package for himself. Booth admitted that he did not usually provide detailed pension numbers during severance negotiations. Pearson contends that the numbers provided for four of the pension payment options were significantly overstated, and Booth, as severance negotiator for Voith Paper, had an economic incentive to save money for his employer and negotiate a lower severance package. By leading Pearson to believe his pension would be higher than it actually was, Booth was able to negotiate more favorable terms for Voith Paper. None of this evidence, however, demonstrates an intentional misrepresentation by the Plan. First, in every ERISA estoppel claim filed by an employee, the error will always be in the employer’s favor. An employee is unlikely to ask a court to estop a plan from paying more than the employee is entitled to under the written terms of a pension plan.

The mere fact that there is an error that is in the employer’s favor tells us nothing about the intent of the party making the error. Second, although Pearson’s employer, Voith Paper, had an incentive to negotiate a lower severance package with Pearson, the Plan had no incentive at all to provide incorrect information to Pearson as a Plan participant. True, Booth served both as Voith Paper’s Human Resources manager and as the
Plan’s administrator, but only in his capacity as Voith Paper’s manager did he have any reason to provide inflated pension numbers to Pearson.”

Affirmed.

09-3884 Pearson v. Voith Paper Rolls, Inc.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Griesbach, J., Rovner, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests