Skip to main content

Alexander Manufacturing, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership & Trust v. Illinois Union Insurance

D. Or.February 22, 2010No. CV. 06-735-PKCited 13 times
SettlementIllinois Union Insurance Company$425,000 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Papak
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
settlement
State
Oregon

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

After the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal, the parties settled the insurance coverage dispute. Illinois Union agreed to pay the Trust $425,000 in judgment, with the Trust subsequently awarded partial attorney fees and costs.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** Alexander Manufacturing had an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) - a program where workers own shares in their company. The ESOP had insurance coverage through Illinois Union Insurance Company. When the ESOP needed to make an insurance claim, Illinois Union Insurance refused to pay, claiming they weren't required to cover the situation. The ESOP sued the insurance company for breaking their contract by not providing the coverage they had paid for. **What the Court Decided:** Initially, a lower court dismissed the case, but a higher appeals court reversed that decision, allowing the lawsuit to continue. Rather than continue fighting in court, Illinois Union Insurance agreed to settle. They paid the ESOP $425,000 to resolve the dispute. The ESOP also received additional money to cover some of their legal fees and court costs. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This case shows that employee-owned companies and their benefit plans can successfully fight back when insurance companies wrongfully deny coverage. Workers in ESOPs should know that their ownership plans have legal protections, and insurance companies can't simply refuse to pay valid claims without consequences. The settlement demonstrates that persistence in fighting insurance denials can lead to meaningful financial recovery.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.