Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment, after finding that defendant, as purchaser of assets from third-party company, could not liable under theory of successor liability for withdrawal liability arising out of third-party’s failure to continue making pension payments to plaintiff-pension fund as required under collective bargaining agreement. While Dist. Ct. found that there was insufficient evidence to show that defendant was aware at time of assert purchase that third-party could be liable to plaintiff for failing to make pension payments, record showed that there was triable issue as to whether successor liability applied in instant case, where: (1) representative of defendant had notice at time of asset purchase that third-party was signatory to collective bargaining agreement, that there was possibility of future withdrawal liability and that instant pension fund was insufficiently funded; and (2) there was enough evidence to create triable issue as to whether there was substantial continuity in operation of defendant’s and third-party’s businesses so as to allow for imposition of successor liability.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Pensions