HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-7681
AMERISERV FINANCIAL, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PETITIONER : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
V. :
:
:
THOMAS McKEON, :
RESPONDENT : 11-7681 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: PETITION TO VACATE OR MODIFY ARBITRATION AWARDS
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Masland, J., May 24, 2012:--
Before the court is a Petition to vacate or modify arbitration awards filed by
Ameriserv Financial, Inc., Petitioner, regarding an award obtained by Thomas
McKeon, Respondent. After careful review of the parties’ briefs and oral
argument, the court denies the petition to vacate or modify the arbitration awards.
I. Facts
1
The facts are not in dispute.
1. AmeriServ Financial, Inc. [Petitioner] is a bank holding company
headquartered in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.
2. On January 22, 2007, Petitioner and Bruce L. Marra, Janet Marra and
[Respondent] Thomas McKeon entered into a stock purchase agreement
(“Stock Purchase Agreement”), pursuant to which AmeriServ purchased
100% of the capital stock of West Chester Capital Advisors, Inc. (“the
Company”).
3. [Respondent] has received all of the portion of the purchase price for
the stock of the Company due to him.
4. [Petitioner] continues to own 100% of the capital stock of the Company.
5. On March 6, 2007, the Company, [Petitioner], AmeriServ Bank and
[Respondent] entered into an employment agreement, a true and correct
copy of which is attached as Exhibit A.
1
Prior to arbitration the parties entered into a joint stipulation of facts. See Stipulation of Facts, Pet. Ex. A.
11-7681 CIVIL TERM
6. In December 2008, [Petitioner] received $21,000,000 in financial
assistance from the U.S. Treasury under the Troubled Asset Relief
Program Capital Purchase Program (“TARP”).
7. The funds received by [Petitioner] under the TARP program have not
yet been repaid.
8. On May 3, 2010, the Company terminated [Respondent’s] employment.
9. [Respondent’s] employment with the Company was not terminated for
“Cause” within the meaning of Section 3(a) of the Employment
Agreement.
10. The termination of [Respondent’s] employment did not follow a
“Change in Control” within the meaning of Section 5(b) of the Employment
Agreement.
11. [Respondent’s] annual base salary as of the date of the termination of
his employment was $181,000. [Respondent] did not receive any bonus
award in any of the three calendar years immediately preceding the
termination of his employment.
12. In 2009, aside from [Petitioner’s] “senior executive officers”,
[Respondent] was the second “most highly compensated employee” of
[Petitioner] and its affiliated entities, which collectively constitute the
“TARP Recipient”, as the terms “senior executive officer”, “most highly
compensated employee” and “TARP Recipient” are defined in Section
30.1 of the Interim Final Rule, TARP Standards for Compensation and
Corporate Governance, 74 Fed. Reg. 28394, 28408 (June 15, 2009), 31
C.F.R. Part 30 (“the Interim Rule”). A true and correct copy of the Interim
Final Rule is attached as Exhibit B.
13. The Company provided [Respondent] with his base salary and fringe
benefits for the period ending June 3, 2010.
14. Neither the Company, [Petitioner] or AmeriServ Bank paid
[Respondent] any of the amounts described in Subsections 7(a) and (b) of
the Employment Agreement.
Pet. Ex. A (emphasis added).
II. Employment Agreement
The relevant portions of the Employment Agreement read:
-2-
11-7681 CIVIL TERM
7. Rights in Event of Termination of Employment Without Cause in
Absence of Change in Control. In the event that [Respondent’s]
employment is terminated by the Company without Cause and no Change
in Control shall have occurred at the date of such termination,
[Respondent] shall be entitled to receive the amounts and benefits set
forth in this section.
(a) Current Compensation at Termination. For a period of one
year from the date of termination of employment, [Respondent] shall be
paid his Current Compensation at Termination.
(i) For purposes of this section, the term “Current
Compensation at Termination” means the sum of (A) [Respondent’s] base
salary as of the date of termination of employment (or prior to any
reduction thereof preceding termination of employment), and (B) a dollar
amount equal to the average of the awards [Respondent] received as
bonuses (including deferred bonuses) for each of the three calendar years
preceding the year in which the termination of employment occurs.
(ii) Amounts required to be paid to [Respondent] under this
Section 6(a) shall be paid in a lump sum within 30 days following the date
of termination of employment.
(b) Benefits. For a period of one year from the date of termination
of employment [Respondent shall receive a continuation of all life, medical
insurance and other welfare benefits (other than disability insurance) in
effect with respect to [Respondent] during the two calendar years prior to
his termination of employment …. At the election of the Company, the
amount required to be paid by this Section 7(b) may be paid as a lump
sum equal to the Company’s good faith estimate of the present value of
such benefits.
Employment Agreement ¶¶7(a)-(b).
III. Regulations
At the outset, the court notes, as reflected in the parties’ stipulation, there
is no dispute that at the time of termination, Petitioner was a TARP recipient and
Respondent was a highly compensated employee governed by TARP’s Golden
Parachute provisions. The real issue the parties submitted to the Arbitrator was
whether the disputed payments constituted Golden Parachute payments as
-3-
11-7681 CIVIL TERM
described by the applicable Treasury Department Regulations. The relevant
regulations provide:
Golden parachute payment. (1) General rule. The term “golden parachute
payment” means any payment for the departure from a TARP recipient for
any reason, or any payment due to a change in control of the TARP
recipient or any entity that is included in a group of entities treated as one
TARP recipient, except for payments for services performed or benefits
accrued.
…
Payments for services performed or benefits accrued. (i) General rules …
a payment made … is for services performed or benefits accrued only if
the payment was made, or the right to the payment arose, for current or
prior …. Whether a payment is for services performed or benefits accrued
is determined based on all the facts and circumstances. However, a
payment, or a right to a payment, generally will be treated as a payment
for services performed or benefits accrued only if the payment would be
made regardless of whether the employee departs or the change in
control event occurs, or if the payment is due upon the departure of the
employee, regardless of whether the departure is voluntary or involuntary
(other than reasonable restrictions, such as the forfeiture of the right to a
payment for an involuntary departure for cause, but not restrictions
relating to whether the departure was a voluntary departure for good
reason or subsequent to a change in control).
31 CFR § 30.1 (emphasis added).
IV. Arbitrator’s Decision
Pursuant to paragraph nine of the employment agreement, the parties
submitted this dispute to Arbitration conducted by the American Arbitration
Association. The Arbitrator ultimately concluded that the payments did not
constitute a Golden Parachute. He reasoned:
[T]he [Petitioner] desired to retain the [Respondent’s] services for at
least four years during which period West Chester would transition its
clients and culture into the [Petitioner]. And it is also clear to the
Arbitrator, that the Employment Agreement was part of the total mix of
consideration bargained-for by the [Respondent] when considering the
sale of his West Chester stock to the [Petitioner].
-4-
11-7681 CIVIL TERM
Therefore, the Arbitrator finds that the Termination Payments,
based on all the facts and circumstances of this dispute, are not Golden
Parachute Payments under the Regulations, but, fall under the exception
for services performed or benefits accrued. These Termination Payments
were part of the consideration for the Stock Purchase Agreement, i.e.,
[Respondent’s] expectation for a 4-year term of employment, excepting
termination for cause; and are due to the [Petitioner] “regardless of
whether the departure is voluntary or involuntary.”
Interim Award of Arbitrator at 7.
Following the Arbitrator’s decision, Petitioner sought relief in this court by
filing a Petition to Vacate or Modify Arbitration Awards.
V. Discussion
At the outset we note our courts “strongly favor the settlement of disputes
by arbitration.” Langston v. National Media Corp., 596 A.2d 860, 864 (Pa. Super.
1991). Accordingly, our review of a Common Law Arbitration proceeding is
exceedingly narrow. Specifically, “[t]he award of an arbitrator in a nonjudicial
arbitration … is binding and may not be vacated or modified unless it is clearly
shown that a party was denied a hearing or that fraud, misconduct, corruption or
other irregularity caused the rendition of an unjust, inequitable or unconscionable
award.” 42 Pa.C.S. §7341 (emphasis added). Further, “arbitrators are the final
judges of both law and fact, and an arbitration award is not subject to a reversal
for a mistake of either.” McKenna v. Sosso, 745 A.2d 1, 4 (Pa. Super. 1999)
(emphasis added).
Here, Petitioner argues the Arbitrator erred in holding the Termination
Payments constituted payments for services rendered and benefits accrued and
consequently rendered the award unjust, inequitable, or unconscionable as the
-5-
11-7681 CIVIL TERM
award required Petitioner to violate applicable federal law and subject Petitioner
to federal penalties.
Petitioner points to both the Treasury Regulations and the language of the
Employment Agreement to support its position. Specifically, the Regulations
state:
[A] payment for services performed or benefits accrued only if the
payment would be made regardless of whether the employee
departs or the change in control event occurs, or if the payment is
due upon the departure of the employee, regardless of whether the
departure is voluntary or involuntary ….
31 CFR § 30.1 (emphasis added). Meanwhile, Section 7 of the Employment
Agreement clearly conditions eligibility for the Termination Payment upon
Respondent’s termination without cause. Accordingly, had Respondent been
terminated involuntarily, with cause, he would not have been entitled to the
Termination Payment. Thus, the Payment is not for services rendered or
benefits accrued because Respondent is not entitled to it regardless of whether
termination was voluntary or involuntary.
We find this argument persuasive, and if we were conducting a de novo
review we would be constrained to agree. However, as previously stated, our
review here is decidedly narrow and what we perceive to be an error of law is
insufficient for us to vacate an arbitration award. McKenna v. Sosso, 745 A.2d
1, 4 (Pa. Super. 1999). Further, Petitioner has failed to establish it was denied a
hearing or was the victim of fraud, misconduct, corruption or other irregularity.
Moreover, we do not consider the award to be unjust, inequitable or
-6-
11-7681 CIVIL TERM
unconscionable -- in the grand scheme of parachutes, this one was gold-plated
at best.
We are also unconvinced by Petitioner’s contention that compliance with
the Arbitration Award would force it to violate federal law and subject it to criminal
sanction. We hesitate to predict the response of an appellate court, let alone
another branch of government, but are relatively confident that with our Court
Order in hand, Petitioner will avoid the wrath of the Treasury Department.
VI. Conclusion
For all these reasons, the Petition to Vacate or Modify Arbitration Awards
is denied and the Final Arbitration Award is affirmed in all respects.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of May, 2012, the Petition to Vacate or
DENIED
Modify Arbitration Awards is and the Final Arbitration Award is
AFFIRMED
.
By the Court,
Albert H. Masland, J.
G. Thompson Bell, III, Esquire
111 North Sixth Street
P.O. Box 679
Reading, PA 19603-0679
For Petitioner
William T. Wilson, Esquire
17 West Miner Street
P.O. Box 660
West Chester, PA 19381-0660
For Respondent :saa
-7-
AMERISERV FINANCIAL, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PETITIONER : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
V. :
:
:
THOMAS McKEON, :
RESPONDENT : 11-7681 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: PETITION TO VACATE OR MODIFY ARBITRATION AWARDS
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of May, 2012, the Petition to Vacate or
DENIED
Modify Arbitration Awards is and the Final Arbitration Award is
AFFIRMED
.
By the Court,
Albert H. Masland, J.
G. Thompson Bell, III, Esquire
111 North Sixth Street
P.O. Box 679
Reading, PA 19603-0679
For Petitioner
William T. Wilson, Esquire
17 West Miner Street
P.O. Box 660
West Chester, PA 19381-0660
For Respondent :saa