[Vision2020] UI Retirees Head Back to District Court

[Tom Hansen]

Courtesy of today's (March 18, 2010) Moscow-Pullman Daily News.

-----------------------------------------------------------

UI retirees head back to district court; dispute continues over final
judgement
Hearing scheduled for April; Supreme Court appeal filed Tuesday

Staff report

The University of Idaho and a group of former employees who sued it in
2008 will be back in Latah County District Court next month as part of a
dispute over the case’s final judgment and over who should pay the UI’s
court and attorney costs.

As expected, the former employees also are appealing the case to the Idaho
Supreme Court, according to a Tuesday filing by their Moscow-based
attorney, Ron Landeck. The more than 250 UI retirees filed a class-action
suit against their former employer when the UI made changes to their
health and life insurance benefits following the recommendations of a 2007
cost-cutting task force.

They had signed early retirement buyout offers with the UI in 1999 and
2002 that stated they would receive certain benefits as detailed “under
existing UI policy,” which the contracts themselves did not define.

Latah County District Judge John Stegner acknowledged in his Nov. 2
granting of summary judgment in the UI’s favor that the contracts were
ambiguous. However, he pointed out both parties had referenced the UI
Faculty-Staff Handbook, which includes a clause that states the university
reserves the right to modify or reduce its benefits. After the retirees
filed a motion for reconsideration of Stegner’s decision, the judge
reaffirmed his ruling in the UI’s favor Feb. 3.

Stegner made a final judgment in the case Feb. 11 at the request of the UI
and its Boise-based attorney, Bruce Rubin.

However, Landeck and the retirees filed a new motion Feb. 25 asking for
the final judgment to be altered or amended and to relieve the retirees
and their representatives of having to pay the UI’s attorney and
litigation fees.

In a brief filed Friday in support of the Feb. 25 motion, Landeck stated
the court and both sides’ attorneys had already treated the Nov. 2
granting of summary judgment as the case’s final judgment and that the
Feb. 11 final judgment voids the Feb. 3 “post-judgment decision.”

“(T)he post-judgment processes in this case have been convoluted,
redundant, open-ended and disorderly,” the brief states.

The retirees also are objecting to the UI’s request for attorney fees in
part because Stegner acknowledged the early retirement contracts were
ambiguous.

“(T)he UI invited this litigation, and it is at fault for drafting
ambiguous agreements,” the brief states.

Rubin’s March 11 reply to the retirees’ new motions states the UI is
seeking about $403 in court costs, more than $89,000 in attorney fees and
almost $5,000 in litigation costs.

The reply states the early retirement buyout contracts called for the
payment of lawsuit-related fees in case of unsuccessful litigation against
the UI.

“Contrary to the plaintiffs’ assertions, the university is not seeking to
‘penalize’ or ‘intimidate’ the plaintiffs by bringing a claim for costs,”
the reply states.

Rubin’s reply also asserts “there can be no legitimate dispute that the
university is the prevailing party in this action” and that the retirees
had been informed of the university’s right to change benefits prior to
filing their lawsuit.

Stegner will hear the retirees’ new motions and the UI’s reply in a
hearing scheduled for 10:30 a.m. April 19 in Latah County District Court.

-----------------------------------------------------------

April 19th - Mark it on your calendars, V-peeps.

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

"The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
and the Realist adjusts his sails."

- Unknown