Also, a cursory look at the filings indicates that the Indiana Pensioners will likely have an uphill climb as their two main points are demonstrably subjective i) whether the 363 sale was sub rosa plan, and ii) whether the US is allowed to use TARP funding for auto bailouts. Granted, some degrees of freedom in both, but what likely could have produced more bankable results would have been a valuation fight, where Lauria could have brought in an expert to opine as to the value of a liquidated Chrysler, and state (objectively) that this value is significantly higher than that presented by Capstone's highly discredited banker Robert Manzo. Arguing against the good faith preparation of his report, together with a justified higher valuation liquidation analysis would have potentially given the Judge much less subjective leeway.
But who knows, stranger things have happened.
The main briefs presented:
Publish at Scribd or explore others: Short Stories Research Math & Engineering Law & Government Finance bankruptcy objection
Sphere: Related Content Print this post