IBJNews

Defunct ATA Airlines awarded $66M in FedEx lawsuit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An Indianapolis jury has returned a $65.9 million verdict against Memphis-based FedEx in a breach-of-contract lawsuit brought in 2008 by now-defunct ATA Airlines.

The former Indianapolis carrier alleged FedEx broke a long-term contract with ATA to fly troops on behalf of the federal government. ATA ceased operations in April 2008, shortly after it was informed by FedEx that it would no longer be part of FedEx’s military contracting team.

Last week, the U.S. District Court jury said ATA is entitled to $21.9 million in lost profits for 2008 and $43.9 million in lost profits for 2009.

ATA originally had sought $94 million. Last April, however, FedEx won a partial summary judgment that tossed out some of ATA’s claims, leaving just the breach-of-contract charge.  In a recent regulatory filing prior to the Oct. 19 verdict, FedEx declared: “We still do not believe that any material loss is probable.”

“We respectfully disagree with the jury’s findings and are evaluating our options,” FedEx spokeswoman Sandra Munoz told IBJ on Monday.  It is widely expected that the company will appeal the verdict, which was reached after three hours of deliberations.

Any money ATA ultimately recovers will be distributed to creditors, including pilots, said Ken Broughton, an attorney for Texas-based Haynes and Boone LLP, which represented the airline.

In a statement, Broughton said that “unfortunately, any judgment ATA recovers from FedEx won’t revive" ATA.

According to bankruptcy records, ATA had 4,970 unsecured claims totaling $571.6 million as of June 30. The largest unsecured creditor listed is Wells Fargo Northwest, seeking $301 million.

ATA, founded in the 1970s by Latvian immigrant George Mikelsons, grew to be the nation’s 10th-largest scheduled passenger airline. An expensive fleet upgrade begun prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks came back to haunt ATA as the industry slowed in the years to follow.

ATA filed its first Chapter 11 reorganization in October 2004. At first, Southwest Airlines bought a portion of ATA stock, along with New York vulture firm MatlinPatterson.  ATA’s headquarters were moved to suburban Atlanta, where the carrier became part of a larger organization based there—Global Aviation Holdings, operator of charter carriers World Airways and North American Airlines.

Dallas-based Southwest walked away with ATA’s valuable gate slots, including those in New York City.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • ATA & MatlinPatterson
    MatlinPatterson are INDEED a "VULTURE FIRM".

    They Screwed Varig in Brazil, they screwed ATA in the U.S., and they are currently pulling the purse-strings at Global Aviation Holdings (parent of World Airways & North American Airlines) in Peachtree City, Georgia.

    These people are nothing but VULTURES and don't give a damn about ANYTHING but profit.

    We all hope to God that the World Airways filing with the SEC to go public (again) takes-off, before World is stripped of its' assets and its' rich history.......

    SHAME ON YOU MatlinPatterson!!!!! You people are nothing but financial RAPISTS!
  • "Vulture" firms
    Let me learn you, Freudian Slip and Typo?Really? -- "vulture firm" is a real name on Wall Street for investment firms that buy assets of distressed companies, hoping to fixem' up and sell them later for a profit. Go back to reading the Star and have another fistful of Slim Jims.
  • Freudian Slip?
    That is the first time I have seen a Freudian slip in writing. How appropriate.
  • Typo? Really?
    "...New York vulture firm MatlinPatterson."

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

  2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

  3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

  4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

  5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

ADVERTISEMENT