Five Former MLB Umps Seek $2 Million in Federal Court

Five retired Major League Baseball umpires filed a federal lawsuit in New York in late September, alleging their pension plan underpaid them by more than $2 million. The suit targets the American Leagues and National Leagues of Professional Baseball Clubs Retirement Income Plan for Umpires and its retirement committee.

The plaintiffs argue that their retirement benefits were not calculated correctly. As a result, they claim the plan owes them additional funds to fix the discrepancy. The group includes Joe West, Tom Hallion, Gerry Davis, Larry Vanover, and Jerry Layne. West, 74, retired after the 2021 season following a career that began in 1976. He officiated 5,460 games, a record for the position. Davis also retired after 2021, while Hallion played through 2022. Vanover and Layne both stepped away after the 2024 campaign.

The legal dispute appears to have stemmed from a failed negotiation over a settlement offer. West stated that he raised the underpayment issue with the retirement committee and was presented with a sum he deemed too small. He recalled a conversation with Steven Gonzalez, the MLB senior vice president and chief employment counsel. West said Gonzalez told him, "If you don't like the number, sue us."

West responded by referencing his own legal history, including a 2021 defamation victory against former player Paul Lo Duca. In that case, West won more than $500,000 in damages after Lo Duca claimed on a podcast that West widened the strike zone for reliever Billy Wagner in exchange for driving one of Wagner's vintage cars. West asked, "Does Steve Gonzalez not know my history with dealing with lawsuits?"

Paul B. Holmes, the attorney leading the legal team, noted that the five umpires are suing in their individual capacity. The umpires' union was not involved in the initial filing. The case is now in the early stages of federal court proceedings. A pretrial conference is scheduled for December 11, where the court and parties will discuss next steps for the litigation.

The filing marks a formal challenge to the financial calculations of the pension fund for the group. The plaintiffs seek to correct what they view as a systemic error in benefit distribution. The lawsuit places the retirement committee in direct contention with the former officials over the final value of their service.