IBJNews

Supreme Court rejects Indiana's appeal of Chrysler sale

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to take another look at Chrysler's bankruptcy.

The justices on Monday turned down an appeal from the state of Indiana pension funds that earlier challenged the automaker's bankruptcy proceedings. The bulk of Chrysler LLC's assets were sold to Italy's Fiat.

The court previously rejected the pension funds' effort to block the sale.

In the latest appeal, the funds argued that the arrangement worked out with Fiat and approved by federal courts violated federal bankruptcy law. The pension funds said they were not trying to reverse the bankruptcy sale, but instead wanted to recover money for themselves and other Chrysler creditors.

The Supreme Court in June rejected the appeal by a trio of Indiana pension and construction funds to block the automaker's sale. The court at that time did not consider the merits of the opponents' arguments, only whether to hear their full-blown appeal.

Indiana officials claimed the sale unfairly favored Chrysler's unsecured stakeholders, such as the United Auto Workers, ahead of secured debt holders like the pension funds.

Under the deal, the automaker's secured debtholders got about $2 billion in cash, or about 29 cents on the dollar, for their combined $6.9 billion in debt. Some of the debtholders balked at the deal, saying as secured lenders they deserved more. The Indiana funds involved in the Supreme Court appeal held about $42.5 million, or less than 1 percent, of Chrysler's $6.9 billion in secured debt. They bought it in 2008 for 43 cents on the dollar.

The funds also challenged the constitutionality of the Treasury Department's use of money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program to supply Chrysler's bankruptcy protection financing. They say the government did so without congressional authority.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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. these guys only skill was to steal from other's hard earned savings.

  2. I voted for him last time and it WAS the LAST time. He needed to to quit running around the world on useless trips, and giving our $$ away to sports teams. I'll vote for anyone but Ballard next time. BTW...we gave $40M to the Pacers and cannot even watch the games on TV.

  3. For the people concerned about traffic, you should know that mixed-use projects (like the one being proposed), actually allows for and encourages more people to walk and bike, thereby mitigating additional automobile traffic. If we continue to design and build suburban-type projects in the City (i.e. automobile-oriented projects), we are not offering anything different from what the suburbs offer, which means we will continue to lose jobs/people to the suburbs. The reason Broad Ripple is somewhat successful today is that people want to live in a place that offers the convenience of being able to walk/bike to restaurants, retail, nightlife, the Monon, etc. Why would you not want to support a project that is complimentary to what already makes the area desirable? The real argument with this project should be its lack-luster design and layout, not the density.

  4. It is unfortunate that there is a perception that celebrities validate an event. The Indy 500 stands on its own, especially for those coming in from out of town. It was always so disturbing to read the gushing descriptions of Ashley Judd threaded throughout the local coverage. Very happy that era is at an end.

  5. Good ole' Obamacare. Thanks liberals and those who didn't bother to vote.

ADVERTISEMENT