Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. George W. Rogers, 92-2435 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Number: 92-2435 Visitors: 20
Filed: Dec. 16, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 14 F.3d 600 17 Employee Benefits Cas. 2763 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit. CENTRAL STATES, SOUTHEAST & SOUTHWEST AREAS PENSION FUND, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George W. ROGERS, et al., Defendants-Appellants. No. 92-2435. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Dec. 16, 1993
More

14 F.3d 600

17 Employee Benefits Cas. 2763

NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
CENTRAL STATES, SOUTHEAST & SOUTHWEST AREAS PENSION FUND,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
George W. ROGERS, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 92-2435.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Dec. 16, 1993.

Before: KEITH, JONES, Circuit Judges, and RUBIN, District Court Judge.*

PER CURIAM:

1

Defendants--Appellants appeal the district court judgment finding that Rogers was a member of the Genesee control group, and therefore, was liable for Genesee's withdrawal liability of $541,543.94.

2

Appellant Rogers argues the district court erroneously held: (1) that Rogers operated a sole proprietorship that constituted trade or business within the meaning of ERISA and (2) that the district court erroneously concluded Roger's sole proprietorship was under common control with D & S Leasing in June 1986, and therefore liable for the assessment of withdrawal liability for $541,543.94. Additionally, Appellant Rogers argues the district court erred in concluding that he received notice of the withdrawal liability assessment as required by statute.

3

Having carefully considered the record and the issues presented in the briefs and at oral argument, we find no error warranting reversal. Because the reasons judgment should be entered against the Appellants and for Appellee have been articulated by the district court, the issuance of a full written opinion by this court would be duplicative and serve no useful purpose. We, therefore, AFFIRM the order by the Honorable Patrick J. Duggan, United States District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, for the reasons set forth in his July 10, 1992, Opinion and Order.

*

The Honorable Carl B. Rubin, United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer