Opinion ID: 786347
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Claim Against Eaton Vance

Text: 13 On February 2, 1999, Wilfredo Hernandez, then an employee of an Eaton Vance subsidiary (Compass Management, Inc.), sent to Eaton Vance a letter indicating that money due him under the Plan had not been deposited into his account. Upon receiving this letter, Eaton Vance contacted its outside ERISA counsel for an evaluation of Hernandez's claim. Although Compass had not adopted the Plan by written resolution, outside counsel advised Eaton Vance that, due to the plain language of the 1984 documents, Hernandez likely would be successful if he chose to litigate. Further, counsel warned Eaton Vance that there would be serious tax consequences if the IRS discovered that the Plan had not been administered according to its terms. Eaton Vance thereafter adopted counsel's advice and has since steadfastly maintained — both before the district court and on appeal — that the 1984 documents were worded so as to cover Hernandez and other similarly situated employees. 14 On April 28, 1999, outside ERISA counsel sent to Hernandez's attorney a letter acknowledging that Eaton Vance should have recognized Hernandez and other similarly affected participants as Plan participants. The letter also stated that Eaton Vance would fund those accounts at the level they would have been funded had the employees been recognized as participants all along. 4