CE-SAGINAW PAVING COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 324 PENSION FUND, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, TRUSTEES OF THE OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 324 PENSION FUND, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee v. EDWARD C. LEVY COMPANY, dba Ace-Saginaw Paving Co. - Articles

All Content

CE-SAGINAW PAVING COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 324 PENSION FUND, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, TRUSTEES OF THE OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 324 PENSION FUND, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee v. EDWARD C. LEVY COMPANY, dba Ace-Saginaw Paving Co.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Aug 6, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: David J. Selwocki, ASHERKELLY, PLLC, Southfield, Michigan, for the Trustees of the Operating Engineers Local 324 Pension Fund.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Kevin M. Williams, LAW OFFICE OF KEVIN WILLIAMS, Louisville, Kentucky, for Ace-Saginaw Company.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: David J. Selwocki, Jacquelyne M. Zolynsky, ASHERKELLY, PLLC, Southfield, Michigan, for the Trustees of the Operating Engineers Local 324 Pension Fund.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Kevin M. Williams, LAW OFFICE OF KEVIN WILLIAMS, Louisville, Kentucky, Paul E. Robinson, SULLIVAN & LEAVITT, P.C., Northville, Michigan, for Ace-Saginaw Company.

Judge(s): BATCHELDER, MOORE, and BUSH, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. This case is about pension funds, actuaries, and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). But we can analogize it to a chat about a basketball game. Imagine asking a professional oddsmaker to give his best estimate of how many points the Louisville Cardinals will give up in their next game. And assume there are no extenuating circumstances. Last season, the Cardinals allowed 70 points on average, and they never surrendered more than 93.1 The oddsmaker predicts 100—what a seemingly odd forecast. But then he adds, “by the way, I think there’s a 77–95% chance the Cardinals will give up fewer points than that.” Now the oddsmaker is just rude; perhaps he doesn’t think so poorly of the Cardinals’ chances, but he certainly didn’t give his best estimate when he predicted 100 points for the other team. In the current dispute, ERISA told an actuary to give his best estimate of the withdrawal liability of Ace-Saginaw Paving Company (Ace). Instead, he gave an estimate that he believed would overcount Ace’s withdrawal liability 77–95% of the time. Because he did not give his best estimate, we affirm the district court and hold that his estimate violated 29 U.S.C. § 1393(a)(1).

Attachments: