Court Opinion

ID: 9495176
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:56:29.862566+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:56:51.849277
License: Public Domain

MANION, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
The only reason res judicata does not apply here is because of this court’s (albeit a different panel) express language in Hunt I declaring that the decision would not preclude future recovery. When arbitrator Jaffe eventually issued his final award that did not include a requirement that Hunt make the withdrawal payments, Central States could and should have brought a suit to modify the award rather than to simply enforce it. Section 1401(b) of ERISA permits both options. Under other circumstances, Central States’ failure to sue to modify would preclude its current suit to collect the withdrawal liability under the doctrine of res judicata. Hunt I’s declaration that Central States is not precluded created the law for this case that would not be applicable otherwise.