Automotive Industries Pension Trust Fund v. Tractor Equipment Sales, Inc.

Good Law
73 F. Supp. 3d 1173·2014 WL 5810336·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158611
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 7, 2014Case No. 13-cv-03703-WHOCalifornia8,801 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Re: Dkt. Nos. 29,

INTRODUCTION

Defendants Steven and Rena Van Tuyl (“the Van Tuyls”) owned three residential properties that they leased to third parties. The Van Tuyls also owned a controlling interest in defendant Tractor Equipment Sales, Inc. (“TES”), which participated in plaintiff Automotive Industries Pension Trust Fund (collectively with the plaintiff trustees, the “.Fund”), a multiemployer pension plan as defined under 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (37)(A). The properties and TES were in all respects unrelated except for their common ownership by the Van Tuyls. TES withdrew from the Fund in 2010, triggering withdrawal liability pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act (“MPPAA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1381 et. seq., that remains unpaid. The question I must answer is whether the Fund may enforce the withdrawal liability against the three rental properties because they constitute a “trade or business” under the controlled group theory as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 1301 (b)(1). Because the Van *1177 Tuyls’ leasing activities do not rise to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.