Now Accepting New Clients!

A court properly held that an employee does not have a vested right in certain employee benefits

The court held that when "¶ 4.B of the 2010 MOU is read in its entirety, the paragraph is unambiguous and it does not create the vested right asserted by" plaintiff/counter-defendant-Cass. This was a breach of contract action involving a contract between defendant/counter-plaintiff-MSU and the defendant/cross-defendant-Coalition. Cass was a former employee and member of a union that is part of the Coalition. The gist of his claim was that he, "as a former employee, accrued certain benefits under a contract between MSU and the Coalition, and that the Coalition's decision to disburse those benefits to a group of employees that did not include him improperly divested him of this benefit." He claimed a breach of the 2010 MOU, a contract between MSU and the Coalition, to which he was not a party. Paragraph 4.B capped MSU's healthcare costs at a 5% increase each year. During each of the pertinent years, healthcare costs increased by less than 5%, resulting in an accumulation of over $7 million. Cass contended that because he would have had to pay for the increase in healthcare costs if that increase was above 5%, "he should be entitled to any savings generated under ¶ 4.B." The court held that "the Court of Claims did not err by determining that the meaning of ¶ 4.B was plain and unambiguous, and that it did not create in Cass any vested right to receive a payment from the healthcare savings fund." Immediately following "the phrase indicating that a fund 'shall accrue' to the benefit of Coalition-represented employees, is a grant of discretion to the JHCC" as to the funds. The 2010 MOU "provides that the fund 'shall accrue to the benefit of the employees represented by the Coalition as determined by the JHCC.'" The "identity of the employees represented by the Coalition was clear from the contract; the employees represented by the Coalition were those belonging to the unions expressly listed in the prelude to the 2010 MOU. Thus, the discretion given to the JHCC in this passage is to make a determination about the money that 'shall accrue' under ¶ 4.B." That discretion tended to "cut against the notion that the word 'accrue' refers to the creation of a vested right, and lends credence to the idea that the word 'accrue' was simply the accumulation of a fund, i.e., the accumulation of healthcare savings." Further, the next sentence in ¶ 4.B conclusively rejected the "notion that any employee had a vested right in any accumulated healthcare savings." Affirmed. 

Basic responsibilities of an executor

Originally posted on 01/11/2017 The emotional toils of dealing with the death of a loved one can be considerably difficult. Nevertheless, perseverance is paramount; especially if you are appointed to be an executor to one’s...

What you need to compliment your will

Originally posted on 02/08/2017 Making end-of-life plans usually end with a will, but they shouldn't. Some believe that simply having a will is enough. However, this post will briefly explain how having other estate planning...

The benefits of home health care providers

Originally posted on 03/22/2017 As we get older or suffer an injury, we need a little extra help. Home health care providers or caregivers can provide the assistance needed to handle your or your loved one's health and safety...

What to know about bail conditions

Originally posted on 03/06/2017 If you have been arrested and are being held on the suspicion that you have committed a particular crime, chances are that the only thing you are thinking about is getting out of jail as soon as possible and...

College students and estate planning

Originally posted on 12/16/2016 With college semesters starting up in Michigan, it may not be so easy to get college students to think responsibly. This time can be especially tough with the need of moving back to school and getting...

Three reasons to put a power of attorney in place

Originally posted on 11/08/2016 While no one wants to think of the unfortunate possibility of being incapacitated or of a time when we can't handle our own affairs, this circumstance is a real possibility. If something happens and this...

How to approach parents about estate planning

Originally posted on 12/09/2016 Family forms a strong foundation for many people's first and most intimate community. It is important to strengthen these first relationships so even uncommon questions become natural. For those...

PROBATE 44: Petition for Mental Health Treatment

Michigan’s Mental Health Code governs the civil admission and discharge procedures for a person with a mental illness. Specifically, MCL 330.1434 sets forth the procedure and content requirements for a petition for mental health treatment.

Should you get your criminal record expunged?

Originally posted on 04/12/2017 If you have been convicted of a crime, have served your sentence, and have followed all court recommendations, you should be able to put your past behind you and move on with life. Moving forward is critical...

Choosing the right executor for an estate

Originally posted on 05/28/2017 When people are thinking about planning their estate, they often think about trying to minimize the estate tax, keeping their will updated, and keeping items out of probate court; however, there is another...

Understanding how the Miranda warning works

Originally posted on 11/25/2016 Michigan residents who have seen television police shows or movies involving law enforcement have no doubt watched many dramatic scenes with officers quoting something to the effect of, "You have the...

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000