Background
Union trustees and local unions sued an employer for failing to make required contributions to pension and welfare funds under ERISA and the Labor Management Relations Act. The district court excluded the testimony of the plaintiffs’ auditor, Bradley Soderstrom, for failure to disclose him as an expert witness and granted summary judgment to the employer due to lack of admissible evidence of damages. The district court also awarded attorney fees to the employer but did not set the amount.
The court’s reasoning
The court affirmed the exclusion of Soderstrom’s testimony because the plaintiffs failed to disclose him as an expert witness as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). The court held that the plaintiffs could not prove damages without expert testimony because the business records provided were voluminous and required explanation beyond basic math principles. The court dismissed the appeal regarding attorney fees because the district court had not yet determined the amount, rendering the issue unripe.
Plaintiffs may not use the audit reports, or any other report generated by Mr. Soderstrom or his firm that contain assumptions unsupported by the evidence, to support their claims on summary judgment or at trial.
Opinion at page 6
What it means going forward
Employers facing ERISA contribution claims must ensure that any witness providing complex calculations or opinions is properly disclosed as an expert to avoid exclusion of critical evidence.