Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. Yahn & McDonnell, Inc.

Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Yahn & McDonnell, Inc., 481 U.S. 735 (1987)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1987-05-18
Topic
employee-benefits-and-executive-compensation

noting that separation of powers principles underlie rules of statutory construction | finding that plan sponsors have discretion to pick among the four suggested methods for determining withdrawal liability, to determine the appropriate discount rates, and to decide whether an employer falls under one of several statutory exemptions | noting that separation of powers principles underlie rules of statutory construction | performing similar due process bias analysis and noting the natural conflict that trustees of a pension plan appointed by participating employers and employees may have as fiduciaries in assessing the liability of employers who withdraw funds from the plan | purpose of MPPAA is “to discourage withdrawals from multiemployer pension plans and to ensure the solvency of such plans.” | per curiam by an equally divided Court | per curiam by an equally divided Court | relying on H.R.Rep. No. 869

Citator

Cited by
36 opinions
481 U.S. 735 (1987)

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION
v.
YAHN & McDONNELL, INC., ET AL.

No. 86-231.

Supreme Court of United States.

Argued April 27, 1987 Decided May 18, 1987[*] APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Gary M. Ford argued the cause for appellants in both cases. With him on the briefs for appellant in No. 86-231 were Peter H. Gould, David F. Power, Kenneth S. Geller, Kathryn A. Oberly, and Mitchell L. Strickler. Richard H. Markowitz and Paula R. Markowitz filed briefs for appellants in No. 86-253.

Carl L. Taylor argued the cause for appellees in both cases. With him on the brief were Glenn Summers and William H. Ewing.[†]

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

JUSTICE WHITE took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.

NOTES

[*] Together with No. 86-253, United Retail & Wholesale Employees Teamsters Union Local No. 115 Pension Plan et al. v. Yahn & McDonnell, Inc., et al., also on appeal from the same court.

[†] Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal in No. 86-231 were filed for the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans by Gerald M. Feder, David R. Levin, and Nik B. Edes; and for the Trustees of the United Mine Workers of America 1950 and 1974 Pension Plans by Israel Goldowitz.

Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance in both cases were filed for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States by Stephen A. Bokat and Robin S. Conrad; and for Flying Tiger Line Inc., et al. by Douglas D. Broadwater, R. Franklin Balotti, Jesse A. Finkelstein, William W. Bowser, and Lawrence M. Nagin.