Issue: Under Oregon law, in a case involving a local union, is estoppel a defense available to a defendant in an ERISA action?
| Area of Law: | Employee Law |
| Keywords: | ERISA action; Defense of estoppel; Local union |
| Jurisdiction: | Oregon |
| Cited Cases: | 682 F. Supp. 1506; 641 F.2d 757; 726 F. Supp. 786; 625 F.2d 850 |
| Cited Statutes: | None |
| Date: | 03/01/2001 |
While there has been a split of authority among district courts sitting within the Ninth Circuit, the Oregon District Court has held that equitable defenses may be raised in an ERISA action for past due contributions. In Oregon Laborers-Employers Trust Funds v. Pacific Fence & Wire Co., 726 F. Supp. 786, 788 (D. Or. 1989), the court specifically held that an employer may raise the defense of equitable estoppel in an action to collect delinquent trust fund contributions. But see Trustees of Operating Eng=rs Pension Trust v. O=Dell, 682 F. Supp. 1506, 1516 (D. Nev. 1988) (granting summary judgment, in part, on ground that equitable defenses may not be raised in an ERISA contribution action). The court in Oregon Laborers held that at trial, the employer would be free to present evidence regarding its equitable defenses. The validity of such defenses are to be determined by the judge, not the jury. 726 F. Supp. at 788-89.[1] The Oregon Laborers court interpreted Audit Servs., Inc. v. Rolfson, 641 F.2d 757, 762 (9th Cir. 1981), as holding that the employer may raise equitable defenses, even though the facts in Audit Services did not support an equitable estoppel.
In order to support an equitable estoppel in the context of an ERISA contribution action, four factors are relevant: (1) the party to be estopped must know the facts; (2) he must intend that his conduct shall be acted on or must […]