Chrysler 363 Sale Approved - Judge G Says Not a Sub Rosa Plan

Late Sunday night (11:15 PM to be precise) Judge Gonzalez handed down his 47-page Opinion approving the sale of most of Chrysler's assets that had any value to Fiat.SpA .  I haven't had a chance to read amd digest it yet, but it does address the sub rosa plan issue head-on.  It does not appear to deal directly with the rejection of executory contracts such as the dealer franchises which was a critical part of the terms ot the contemplated sale, but presumably that won't be far behind.   [UPDATE: Here is Final Order Approving Sale].  The Opinion also purports to give Fiat the protection of 363(m) which make an effective appeal difficult.   Presumably, the actual Order from which any appeal would be made will be entered sometime today.

President Obama reportedly applauded the decisionsaying it gave Chrysler a "new lease on life" and would allow it to "successfully emerge from bankruptcy as a new stronger, more competititve company for the future."   Click here for President Obama's complete statement.

Chrysler has filed a Motion seeking an immediate and expedited appeal DIRECTLY to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, bypassing both the BAP and District Court where an appeal would normally head.  Supportive pleadings have also been filed by Fiat and the UAW.  there has been at least one objection. 

.... Stay tuned - the fun's not over yet.

UPDATE: Appeal time has been reduced from customary 10 days to just 4 which would end on Friday June 5.

363 Bankruptcy Sale FAQ - What You Need to Know to Understand What's Going On with Chrysler and GM

I've been writing a lot lately about the Chrysler bankruptcy and will probably be writing a lot more about the GM bankruptcy to come (it's happening Monday - mid-day press conference in NYC).  As a creditor oriented bankruptcy attorney in a Michigan based firm with more than twenty plus years of experience, I just can't help myself - this really is the biggest thing to come down the pike in my professional life as far as actual relevance to the real world.  I've even written a fair amount about the 363 sale process itself -- and for those of you wanting more detail about how all this works, please visit -- but I thought it might be helpful to address the basic questions about 363 sales in general (and with respect to Chrysler and GM in particular) in one place with, hopefully, a minimum of legalease... 

 

1.                  What is a “363 sale”?

It is a sale of assets in a bankruptcy case, generally in a Chapter 11 reorganization, so named because of the section of the Bankruptcy Code dealing with the procedure. A discrete asset or assets, such as a particular piece of equipment or parcel of real estate, may be sold pursuant to 11 USC §363, or, especially recently, several bankruptcy courts will authorize a sale including all, or substantially all, of the bankrupt company’s assets. The assets will be conveyed to the purchaser free and clear of any liens or encumbrances. Those liens or encumbrances will then be attached to the net proceeds of the sale and paid as ordered by the Bankruptcy Court.

 

2.                  What is the purpose of a 363 sale?

According to the legislative history, the purpose of section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code is to “define the rights and powers of the [bankruptcy] trustee [or Debtor] with respect to the use, sale, or lease of property and the rights of other parties that have interests in the property involved.” It permits the disposition of assets of the bankrupt company outside the ordinary course of business  

 

3.                  What is the process for a 363 sale?

The bankrupt company (known as the Debtor or Debtor-in-Possession) or bankruptcy trustee in chapter 7 cases must file a Motion with the Bankruptcy Court in which the case is pending seeking the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of the terms and conditions of the proposed sale. Opponents of the proposed sale will have a designated response period determined by the pertinent Bankruptcy Court (often 10 or 20 days) in which to file written objections to the proposed sale. Frequently, although not always, this time period will be shortened considerably and be little more than a few days.

 

The Bankruptcy Code then requires “notice and a hearing” on the Motion at which each side can present its argument. Although an “actual” hearing is not required, typically there will be one. Then the Bankruptcy Judge considers the arguments made and either approves the sale as outlined by the Motion or denies approval. If the sale is approved, then the Debtor will proceed with making it a reality.

           

4.                  What is the timeline for a typical 363 sale?

A 363 sale may take anywhere from a few days to several months to complete, depending upon whether there is opposition to the sale and how many parties are interested in purchasing the assets being offered. Generally speaking, the process can be completed in a few weeks.

 

5.                  What information does the motion seeking approval of a 363 sale have to contain?

The Motion or exhibits attached to it must provide detailed information about all of the essential terms and conditions of the contemplated sale, including the identity of the prospective purchaser, purchase price, assets to be sold, and the like. Frequently, the actual Purchase Agreement between the Debtor and prospective purchaser (sometimes referred to as a “stalking horse”) is attached to the Motion as an exhibit.

 

Generally, the Motion will also contained specific detailed provisions regarding the timing and manner applicable to the submission of any competing offers for the assets to be sold.

It is also possible that the Motion will simply seek approval of a auction or other sales procedure to determine who the successful purchaser will be.

 

6.                  What are the requirements for approval of a 363 sale?

 The Bankruptcy Court must determine:

  • Whether the terms of the sale constitute the highest and best offer for the assets to be sold;
  • Whether the negotiations concerning the terms and conditions of the proposed sale were conducted at arm’s length;
  • Whether the sale is in the best interests of the bankruptcy estate and its creditors
  • Whether the purchaser has acted in good faith and the sale itself is being made in good faith [we’re big on “good faith” in bankruptcy law]

Unless the answer to all of these is “yes”, the sale will not be approved. In addition, there are several other requirements designed to protect the interests of creditors who have previously been granted lien on the assets to be sold as collateral for loan or other credited previously given to the Debtor. Essentially, if the purchase price is not enough to pay all of these creditors in full, the sale cannot be approved over the objection of the creditor unless applicable non-bankruptcy law could force the creditor to accept the situation. Because junior lienholders sometimes do not get paid in state court foreclosures, it has been generally assumed that this requirement can be met fairly easily.  

 

7.                  Who decides whether a 363 sale is appropriate?

The bankruptcy judge presiding over the case will determine if the requirements for approval of a 363 sale have been met.

 

8.                  How is a 363 sale different from a plan of reorganization?

It is sometimes argued that the approval of a 363 sale of substantially all of a bankrupt company’s assets early in a bankruptcy will have the practical effect of deciding many important issues that would ordinarily arise in due course during the bankruptcy proceeding and be addressed as part of the plan confirmation process.  

 

A sale of assets in bankruptcy can often be accomplished more quickly with a 363 sale rather than in the context of a plan of reorganization.  A 363 sale requires only the approval of the Bankruptcy Judge while a plan of reorganization must be approved by a substantial number of creditors and meet certain other requirements to be “confirmed.” A plan of reorganization is much more comprehensive than a 363 sale in addressing the overall financial situation of the Debtor and how its exit strategy from bankruptcy will affect creditors. 

 

Additional statutory protections for creditors and greater emphasis on valuation and feasibility of the post-sale business operations made possible by the sale also exist in the case of a plan of reorganization. In addition, there are also statutory notice periods entailing several weeks applicable to the plan confirmation process that cannot be shortened (other than possibly in the context of a prepackaged bankruptcy).

  

A proposed plan of reorganization is a lengthy and extremely detailed document which classifies the claims of various sorts of creditors into designated “classes” and then prescribes various “treatment” concerning how those claims will be dealt with. The Bankruptcy Code requires that the proposed Plan of Reorganization be accompanied by a “Disclosure Statement” similar in purpose and appearance with a prospectus used in the sale of stock and securities. The Disclosure Statement explains how the debtor came to be in bankruptcy and must provide "adequate information" about a plan and its implementation and consequences such that a hypothetical investor would be able "to make an informed judgment about the plan".    

 

9.                  What is a “sub rosa” plan? 

A “sub rosa plan” is what opponents of a 363 sale may call it if they believe the terms and conditions of the proposed 363 sale extend well beyond what they believe is the meaning and purpose of Section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code. The argument here is that except in the context of highly perishable goods, a sale of substantially all of a company’s assets must only be done in the context of, and with the protections of creditors inherent in, the plan confirmation process and a 363 sale is intended only for more piecemeal disposition of assets.

 

10.              What happens to creditors after a 363 sale occurs?

Once a 363 sale has been consummated and the purchase price paid, the bankruptcy court will decide how the proceeds of sale are allocated among secured creditors with liens on the assets sold. In the event additional proceeds exist, they will be allocated to unsecured creditors and other claimants in accordance with the statutory provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.

 

11.              What is a “stalking horse”? 

A “stalking horse” is the initial prospective buyer willing to set forth specific price and terms for the purchase of the bankrupt company’s asset or assets. The prospective purchaser usually negotiates for payment of a break-up or topping fee to it in the event it does not wind up being the approved purchaser to ensure that any competing bid is meaningfully more valuable to the bankrupt company.  

 

12.              What is a “topping fee” or “break-up fee”? 

A “topping fee” or break-up fee” is a specified amount to be paid to a stalking horse in the event that it is not the successful bidder for the assets. The theory is that it will compensate the stalking horse for certain “due diligence” it undertook and ensure that any competing bid is meaningfully more valuable.

 

13.              What are “bidding procedures”?

“Bidding Procedures” are the procedural rules proposed by the Debtor concerning the process and form by which offers for the asset or assets to be sold should be made by parties other than the “stalking horse”, if any. They are often included as part of the 363 Motion as a means of keeping the process orderly and avoiding chaos, but are sometimes seen by other prospective purchasers as designed to chill competing offers by imposing onerous procedural requirements. 

 

14.              What is a “credit bid”?

A “credit bid” occurs when a secured creditor can bid up to the amount of the debt owed it by the Debtor for the purchase price of the assets to be sold without having to come out of pocket for any actual cash. The difference between the amount owed and the credit bid will then become the amount of the lienholder’s unsecured claim.  

 

15.              Is there any recourse after a Bankruptcy Court approves a 363 sale? 

An Order approving a 363 sale can be appealed either to the applicable U.S. District Court or the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the applicable U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, if there is one. Certain statutory provisions have limited the ability of any successful appeal to unwind the transaction, but more recent cases have raised some questions about the proper interpretation of those provisions. 

 

16.              How are the Chrysler and GM bankruptcy 363 sales the same or different from the ordinary 363 sale? 

The Chrysler and likely GM contemplated 363 sales are considerably more complex than a typical 363 sale and involve a number of other provisions adjusting relationships with various creditors such as dealers and suppliers that would more often be found in a plan of reorganization. They are also proceeding much more rapidly than would ordinarily be the case.

 

PREVIOUS POSTS ON THIS BLOG ABOUT CHRYSLER AND GM BANKRUPTCIES:

 

EXTRA! EXTRA! Get Your Chrysler Bankruptcy Info Here!

When you think the Chrysler bankruptcy is one of the most intellectually fascinating things ever to come down the pike ('cept maybe the coming GM extravaganza) and there's more interest amongst the general public in the swine, aka H1N1, flu, you know you're a purebreed bankruptcy law wonk.  For those of like persuasion or who just want a handy reference guide, here's the basic 411 on the Chrysler bankruptcy:

  • We must of course begin with the Chrysler's press release.
  • In what might be seen as a dry run for a GM filing in about a month, Chrysler LLC and many of its subsidiaries and affilated companies filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy on April 30, 2009  - which now becomes the "Petition Date", an important dividing line -- in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 09-50002.  After only one day, there were already more than 130 pleadings filed.  By Sunday afternoon, the Court's docket sheet shows 189 pleadings.  
    • For those with PACER access, the Bankruptcy Court has established a separate URL for Chrysler pleadings
    • For those without access to PACER, the case can be followed directly by visiting the Chrysler Restructuring website which contains a docket containing PDFs of all of the court pleadings, as well as  press releases by the company, and information and FAQ for various sorts of creditors and stakeholders.   For those living under a rock for the past few months, it also has this useful Chapter 11 Fact Sheet
  • The case has been assigned to Judge Arthur J. Gonzalez whose biographical information is available on the website for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.  He joined the bench in 1995 and previously handled the bankruptcies of Enron and WorldCom simultaneously.  For more information about Judge Gonzalez, click here.
  • Chrysler will be represented by the international law firm of Jones Day, headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, led by Corinne Ball out of the firm's New York office.  Click here for a recent interview with Ms. Bell. 
  • The Chrysler bankruptcy petition is fairly unremarkable except that it includes identification of the Fifty Largest Unsecured Creditors instead of the usual Twenty Largest .
  • For those wanting an in-depth overview of how Chrysler sees the game plan, the Affidavit of Ronald E. Kolka in Support of First Day Pleadings is a "must'" read.
  • More than TWENTY "first day" motions were filed.  Sparing you the long technical description, these essentially dealt with the following:
    •   Procedural
      • Joint Administration of bankruptcies of all Chrysler entities.  Intended to increase efficiencies.  Cases not "substantively consolidated" and debts and creditors of each entity remain separate.  GRANTED
      • Reassurance regarding application of automatic stay and related provisions of Bankruptcy Code      
      • Seeking permission to file consolidated list of Top Fifty Unsecured Creditors instead of each entity having to file their own Top Twenty
      • Appointment of Epiq Bankruptcy Solutions, LLC as Claims and Noticing Agent  - basically an outsourcing of the procedural aspects of proof of claim filing and general noticing; very common in large bankruptcies 
      • Seeking to extend deadline for filing bankruptcy schedules and statement of financial affairs '[d]ue to the substantial size, complexity and geographic reach of their operations and the press of business preceding the filing of these cases" -- very common in large cases; nornally these would be due within fifteen days after the Petition Date (or May 15, 2009).
      • Procedures for the assertion and resolution of claims involving recently delivered goods and reclamation claims
      • Compensation arrangements for professionals, i.e counsel for Chrysler and related professionals
      • Seeking expedited" hearing on "first day" motions
      • Establishment of case management and scheduling  procedures      
      • Retention of counsel and other professionals for Chrysler
      • Permission for Jones Day attorneys not admitted to practice in New York to participate in case 
    •   Commercial Relations
    • Business Operations
  • Here's a wrap-up of Friday's hearing.
  • The United States Treasury issued this press release (and the White House issued an identical press release) describing the government's  view of the proper exit plan for Chrysler 
  • The Am Law Daily takes a look at the holdout secured creditors.
  • A media teleconference  presented by the American Bankruptcy Institute can be heard by clicking here and following instructions

 

  • Chrysler 'first day" motion hearing Round II kicks off on Monday, May 4, 2009 at 10  AM;  spectators may use this handy agenda prepared by Jones Day to keep up

>>>>  and finally, some interesting commentary from some of my fellow bloggers:

UPDATE: After a three day hearing which extended into the evening each day, closing arguments were made late Friday afternoon and early evening.  Judge Gonzalez is expected to give his ruling regarding the 363 sale sought by Chrysler on Monday morning, June 1.  It is likely that whatever the ruling, it will be immediately appealed.  And yes, Monday is also the day GM is expected to file its Chpater 11 petition.  BIG BIG day for all of us bankruptcy nerds!!

For more information about 363 sales, visit my post 363 Bankruptcy Sale - What You Need to Know to Understand What's Going On with Chrysler and GM

 

UPDATE (6/1/09)  Late Sunday night, judge Gonzalez issued an opinion approving the proposed sale. 

GM and the Mirage of a Lightning Quick Section 363 Bankruptcy Sale - Even Theoretically It's a Tough Sell

So the latest brilliant (?) idea about what to do about the financial predicament GM finds itself in  - notice nobody is even talking in any meaningful way any more about resuscitating Chrysler - is to do what is known as a "363 sale" (so called because of the section of the Bankruptcy Code allowing it) in a quick two week "surgical" bankruptcy

How would that work?  And could it really be done in less than a fortnight?  Perhaps if you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy and think all those stores about Paul Bunyon are true.  But otherwise, it's one tall tale to swallow.  As Jonathon Glater recently wrote in his NYT news analysis "A Quick Bankruptcy for G.M.?  Not So Fast":

Any hope of a high-speed bankruptcy by General Motors faces a serious obstacle:   a judge -- not the Obama administration, not G.M. management and not the company's creditors -- would reign in court.  

Overview of 363 Sale Process

Leaving aside considerations of "how things actually work in the real world", what are the mechanics involved in making a 363 sale happen?  Well, reduced to the bare essentials, the debtor files a motion (or motions) seeking authorization to sell certain, or all, of its assets.  Sometimes there is a written purchase offer from a prospective purchaser (who is known in bankruptcy circles as a "stalking horse" and will often seek payment of a "break-up fee" or topping fee" to protect against other would-be purchasers) that may be described in, or attached to the Motion.  Other times the Motion seeks authorization of some sort of auction procedure or submission of sealed bids.  Depending upon the complexity and size of the case, these procedures can often be -- and most certainly would be in a GM bankruptcy -- incredibly complicated.  Then the Bankruptcy Court may or may not hear testimony and ultimately issues an order approving the sale as proposed or as modified.     

There are of course rules that govern how all of this is supposed to take place.  Section 363(b)(1) states that a debtor "after notice and a hearing, may use, sell or lease, other than in the course of ordinary business, property of the estate..."  For purposes of a 363 sale, "property of the estate" is essentially the debtor's assets, i.e. equipment, real estate, etc. 

After Notice and a Hearing,,, or Not

And it is true that "after notice and a hearing" has a rather elastic meaning and may not really require an actual hearing in all cases.  According to section 102 of the Bankruptcy Code, it

(A)  means after such notice as is appropriate in the particular circumstances, and such opportunity for a hearing as is appropriate in the particular circumstances; but

(B) authorizes an act without an actual hearing if such notice is given properly and if --

(i)  such a hearing is not requested timely by a party in interest; or

(ii)  there is insufficient time for a hearing to be commenced before such act must be done, and the court authorizes such act.

SO, at least theoretically, a 363 sale could be authorized by the Bankruptcy Court in a matter of days in a GM bankruptcy.  

Section 363(f) - When Sale Can Occur

There are, however, some other requirements which might slow things down, even theoretically speaking.  Section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code will only permit the sale of the debtor's property "free and clear of any interest ,,," (which is of course the whole reason for doing a 363 sale in the first place) if and only if:

  • Applicable non-bankruptcy law permits sale of such property free and clear of such interest;
  • The lienholder or other party with an interest in the property consents;
  • With respect to lienholders, the price at which such property is to be sold is greater than the aggregate value of all liens on the property being sold;  
  • The interest is in bona fide dispute; OR
  • The lienholder or other party with an interest in the property could be compelled, in a legal or equitable proceeding, to accept a money satisfaction of such interest.

Now it used to be that bankruptcy courts routinely reasoned that state foreclosure law -- and similar laws with respect to personal property going by such names as replevin or "claim and delivery") -- provided all the rationale they needed to approve a 363 sale.  After all, the end result of a foreclosure IS that lienholders get however much money is paid at the sheriff's sale in the order of their priority. If you're the third lienholder and the sale proceeds only pay 10% of your debt after the folks ahead of you get paid, that's just too bad; you can still chase the debtor of course, but the successful purchaser at the sheriff's sale now owns the property free and clear of your lien.  The Uniform Commercial Code provides for a similar result when personal property is sold by the secured creditor in a "commercially reasonable" way.

Section 363(m) - What Appeal?

And, thanks to section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, once the Bankruptcy Court had "done the deed"  of authorizing a 363 sale, the reversal or modification of that Order on appeal "does not affect the validity of the sale... under such authorization to an entity that purchased... such property in good faith, whether or not such entity know of the pendency of the appeal, unless such authorization and such sale... were stayed pending appeal."  Because 363 sales were often consummated moments after the Order authorizing them was signed by the Bankruptcy Judge, disgruntled lienholders and other parties in interest often never had a chance to even seek a stay, let alone obtain one.

You may have noticed that I've been using the past tense in the last couple of paragraphs.  That's because the Ninth Circuit U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals Bankruptcy Appellate  Panel recently raised some questions about the supposed invulnerability of an order authorizing a 363 sale.  In Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. v. Knupfer (In re PW, LLC), 391 B.R. 25 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2008), the Bankruptcy Court had authorized a 383 sale in which the ultimately successful purchaser was the bank which held the first priority lien over the objection of the junior lienholder.  The bank "credit bid" the amount that was owed to it so it did not come out of pocket and no dollars flowed into the bankruptcy estate to pay the junior lienholder which a a $2.5 million claim.  The BAP overuled the bankruptcy court with a rather intricate interpretation of section 363(m).  In addition, the case was remanded to the Bankruptcy Court for a more specific demonstration that the provisions of subsection 363(f) were being met.   

For more detail on this case and what the BAP holding may mean  in general, visit "Clear Channel Raises Troubling Issues in Section 363 Sales But Case Doesn't Spell the End of Free-and-Clear Sales" , an article by Christopher Combest and Faye B. Feinstein in the Turnaround Management Journal.

Also check out "Will Section 363 'free and Clear' Sale Orders Survive an Appeal?  A recent Appellate Decision Raises New Doubts" by Robert Eisenbach III of the In the (Red) blog.

Although technically this only affects bankruptcies in the Ninth Circuit on the West Coast  - one place we can be certain GM will not file -- bankruptcy law has long been a procduct of trends starting in one particular jurisdiction.  Thus it's entirely possible that whatever Bankruptcy Court GM winds up facing would adopt this viewpoint.  So the net result of this is that a purchaser at any 363 sale might need to wait out the 10 day appeal period (and any subsequent appeal) before consummating the sale authorized by the Bankruptcy Court.  And some sort of real record will need to be made demonstrating the satisfaction of section 363(f) - there will need to be at least a modicum of due process allowing some preparation time before the hearing.

Other Important Requirements 363 Sales Must Meet 

There's also other substantive requirements that must be met before a 363 sale can be approved.  In the United States Sixth Circuit  -- which is certainly one place a GM bankruptcy might well unfold given its headquarters in Michigan -- a sale of all of the debtor's assets (and possibly by extension, the most important assets) can only be approved "when a sound business purpose dictates such action."  Stephens Indus., Inc. v. McClung,  789 F.2d 386 (6th Cir. 1986).  To determine whether that standard has been met in a particular case, the Bankruptcy Court must look at the following factors:

  • whether the terms of the proposed sale reflect the highest and best offer for the assets
  • whether the negotiations were conducted at arm's length
  • whether the sale is in the best interest of the estate and its creditors

There must also be a finding that the the purchaser has acted in "good faith" and that the sale itself is in "good faith".  The words of a slightly earlier case in the Sixth Circuit, Comm. of Equity Sec. Holders v. Lionel Corp. (In re Lionel), 722 F.2d 1063 (6th Cir. 1983) seem particular pertinent today:

In fashioning its findings, a bankruptcy judge must not blindly follow the hue and cry of the most vocal special interest groups; rather he should consider all salient factors pertaining to the proceeding and, accordingly, act to further the diverse interests of the debtor, creditors and equity holders, alike.  he might, for example, look to such relevant factors as the proportionate value of the asset to the estate as a whole, the amount of elapsed time since the filing, the liklihood that a plan of reorganization will be proposed and confirmed in the near future, the effect of the proposed disposition on future plans of reorganization, the proceeds to be obtained from the disposition vis-a-vis any appraisals of the property, which of the alternatives of use, sale or lease the proposal envisions and most importantly perhaps, whether the asset is increasing or decreasing in value.  This list is not exhaustivee, but merely to provide guidance to the bankruptcy judge. 

By now you're probably starting to understand how unlikely -- even in the theoretical vacuum-- it would be for GM or any other debtor to get in and out of a "surgical" aka "prenegotiated" or "prepackaged" or "controlled" (as if any bankruptcy could really be controlled once filed !). bankruptcy in two weeks, even using a 363 sale.

There's one more thing.  Section 363(b)(2) applies in situations in which antitrust law might apply to the proposed sale.  It REQUIRES a FIFTEEN DAY waiting period, which may be extended, but CANNOT be shortened.  While that might not be relevant in many situtions, it surely could become relevant in a GM bankruptcy.

So there you have it.  Whether it's a Chapter 11 case of a small business or a mega case like GM would be, this is what you have to do in order to sell assets once in bankruptcy.  The procedures also apply in a Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy with a bankruptcy trustee.  The emphasis is on transparency and what is "fair" and "equitable".  And that is not something that can be achieved in a "shotgun" bankruptcy, even if there really was such a beast outside of legend. 

UPDATE (6/1/09): So now it's official - GM is now in bankruptcy.  Filed in NYC, Case No. 09-50026, Judge Gerber presiding.  Check out my post GM Follows Dealership Affiliate to Obtain NYC Venue for Its Bankruptcy for all the basic filing info and press releases.

Looks like I might be wrong about the speed of approval for a sale, but in my defense (A) GM HAS actually been working pretty hard lately before filing to clean up loose ends and (B) I was naive enough to think we would actually go by real bankruptcy rules as opposed to distoring them beyond all recognition.  Nonetheless since GM doesn't actually have a third party seller like Chrysler did, it may still take longer than GM and the obama Administration are planning... even they gave up on the idea of a TWO WEEK surgical bankruptcy.

Why GM Will -- or at Least Should -- File Bankruptcy in Michigan

Lately everyone has stopped talking about IF General Motors will file bankruptcy.  Instead speculation has moved on to WHERE it will happen.  (Click here  and here for more speculation.)

It’s not like you can file just anywhere you want.  Under 28 United States Code section 1408, a company can file ONLY in the following places:

  • Where their principal place of business is
  •  Where the company was incorporated or formed
  •  Where an affiliate or subsidiary has already filed bankruptcy

For GM, these choices boil down to:

 

  • Michigan where its headquarters and many other operations are located
  • Delaware where it is incorporated
  • Possibly New York if it has an affiliate or subsidiary located there

So let’s look at how these stack up.

 

Michigan

 Michigan is the most obvious choice when one thinks about GM and where its business emanates from.  Michigan's Attorney General has even taken the unusual step of sending letters to the CEOs of both Chrysler and General Motors urging them to file bankruptcy in Michigan rather than New York or Delaware.  However, in the overall worsening economy, Michigan bankruptcy courts are likely to see significantly increased filings even apart from a GM bankruptcy filing.  That, together with the relatively less experience Michigan bankruptcy judges have with “big” cases, might make the goal of a quickie “in and out” bankruptcy more difficult to obtain.   

 

Delaware

Other things being equal, Delaware might well be the jurisdiction of choice,  Its bankruptcy judges are very experienced in handling mega-cases, regularly handle cases with national and even international ramifications, and have tended to make many rulings favorable to debtor companies before them.  As GM’s state of incorporation, Delaware falls squarely within the venue provisions.  One drawback might be that Delaware does not have (or at least I couldn't locate) any specific local rules governing prepackaged bankruptcy.  In addition, the governing law in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (of which Delaware is a part) has fairly strict rules for breaking collective bargaining agreements.

 

New York

Like Delaware, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York has bankruptcy judges with substantial experience in handling mega-cases of national importance. In addition, it has specific local rules governing procedures for prepackaged bankruptcies. In the past it has reeled in several large cases that would otherwise not have been filed there.  However, while the lawyers GM has retained to assist it with a possible bankruptcy hale from NYC, New York is a bit of a stretch from a venue perspective.  As others have also noted, only one of GM's many subsidiaries, and  one fairly unrelated to its core business at that, is incorporated in New York.

 

 

     >>>>>>> SO, assuming it's just too difficult to justify a filing in NYC, why choose Michigan over Delaware as the place to file a General Motors bankruptcy?

 

Well for one thing, it's like a death in the family.  People in Michigan need closure.  But if that's not enough,  there's still... 

 

ONE SIMPLE REASON -- Motion to Change VenueSection 1412 of the United States Code provides:

A district court [28 USC 157(a) also gives bankruptcy courts the same authority] may transfer a case or proceeding under title 11 [the Bankruptcy Code] to a district court  [and bankruptcy court in that district], in the interest of justice or for the convenience of the parties.

If General Motors chooses to file in Delaware rather than Michigan, it will be in for one heckuva a nasty fight over venue which will put the brakes on accomplishing anything else in the speedy manner whose importance has been so emphasized.  And the stakes are so high, you can bet this one is going all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. 

 

Whether the case gets transferred from Delaware to Michigan will be up to the Bankruptcy Judge in the jurisdiction General Motors has chosen to file (Delaware in our assumption).  And the party seeking a change of venue does have the burden of demonstrating that a change should be made.

 

Nevertheless, consider the factors usually relied upon by bankruptcy courts in Delaware and elsewhereto decide whether a case should be moved to another bankruptcy court.  A fairly recent Delaware decision (In re Buffets Holdings, Inc. , 397 B.R. 725 (Bktcy D. Del. 2008)), interestingly involving a motion to change venue to Michigan, enumerates the following factors as pertinent to determining what the interest of justice or convenience of the parties dictate

  • plaintiff's [i.e. debtor] choice of forum
  • defendant's [i.e. creditors and parties of interest] forum preference
  • whether the claim arose elsewhere
  • location of books and records and/or the possibioity of viewing the premises if applicable
  • the convenience of the parties as indicated by their relative physical and financial condition
  • the convenience of the witnesses -- but only to the extent that the witnesses may actually be unavailable for trial in one of the fora
  • practical considerations that would make the trial easy, expeditious, or inexpensive
  • the relative administrative difficulty in the two fora resulting from congestion of the coourts' dockets
  • the public policies of the fora
  • the familiarity of the judge with the applicable state law
  • local interest in deciding local controversies at home

When one considers the place the auto industry holds in the Michigan economy and the numerous employees and retirees living there, it seems obvious that the case should unfold in Michigan.  Now, I'm not saying an argument couldn't be made for Delaware, and perhaps even New York, based primarily on the experience of their bankruptcy judges with large cases.  One might also argue that a Delaware bankruptcy court could be more objective than one in Michigan although one could also argue that the inate understanding of what a GM bankruptcy neans is precisely WHy it should take place in Michigan.  All I'm saying is that if getting in and out really is a priority to General Motors, filing anywhere but Michigan is going to have the case tied up for weeks, if not months.  

And the same goes for Chrysler...

UPDATE: Well they both wound up filing in NYC.  Chrysler just got its sale approved although it appears there will be appeals. And GM, well,click here for details on its filing.

Two Week "Surgical" Bankruptcy for GM? REALLY!!!???!!!

Earlier this week The New York Times ran a story entitled "'Surgical' Bankruptcy Possible for G.M." .  It suggested that the new plan being developed was for GM to be in and out of bankruptcy in TWO WEEKS!!    REALLY!!????!!  I didn't get off the boat yesterday. 

I LOL (LAUGHED OUT LOUD for the uninitiated)!!!!!!    It's a late April Fools joke, right?  Two months maybe if everything went just so, but TWO WEEKS???  I don't think so.

GM continues to claim that a quick restructuring, preferably outside bankruptcy, is necessary so that its image and sales are not permanently damaged.  NEWSFLASH!!  GM's image and sales are already damaged - it has NOWHERE TO GO BUT UP!!!!  In fact, bankruptcy might actually really help it do serious damage control.

One plan reportedly under consideration would essentially do a Bankruptcy Code section 363 sale.  The idea would be to sell all the desirable "good assets" of GM to a newly created company, GM Newco, if you will.  The less desirable assets would be left in the GM we know today (let's call it "old GM") and then liquidated, perhaps by converting the case to a Chapter 7.  The "legacy" obligations such as pensions and health care costs would also be left in old GM; the idea would be that the funds received by old GM for the conveyance of the "good" assets to GM Newco would be used to pay only a portion of the obligations of old GM.  The remaining portion would simply go unpaid, except to the extent paid by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation which would be sorely challenged to fund this fully.  Where would GM Newco get the money to do this?  Probably from the taxpayers in the short run, although it would be possible to have the private sector buy new stock in GM Newco.  Click here for a more detailed exp;lanation of how this would work.

I actually think this sounds like a pretty good idea and one which would allow GM to regoup and move forward as a company with some potential to become profitable again.  I'm just extremely skeptical about the timeline being suggested.

Supposedly, the "creditors committee", which is an important force in any large (and even some not so mega) Chapter 11 case,  would be formed prior to the filing and work on hammering out details before the filing occurred   While that would certainly help speed up the time in bankruptcy, the creditors' committe only includes the very largest unsecured creditors and there's really no way to negotiate with every single creditor GM has before filing.

It only takes ONE objection to the contemplated 363 sale to slow things down.  It seems virtually impossible to me that every single creditor will agree that the funds coming into old GM represents "fair consideration" for the assets conveyed to GM Newco.  An objection on this basis would HAVE to be heard by the Bankruptcy Court and it seems to me that due process would require at least a modicum of time for preparation for this hearing by the party raising the objection.

There's also a question of how the legacy debts for pensions and contracts with labor unions would have to be dealt with.  Section 1113 (concerning collective bargaining agreements) and 1114 o(concerning pensions) of the Bankruptcy Code might have something to say about that. 

And at least some Bankruptcy Courts have refused to allow section 363 sales when they are tantamount to a Plan of Reorganization because they deal with substantially all or the core assets of a debtor.  If you do have to go the plan route, there are statutory provisions in excess of two weeks that must be observed before a hearing can be held.

 Others are skeptical too.  Click here for another blogger's assessment of the challenges faced in making a two week "surgical" bankruptcy happen. And the WSJ is skeptical as well, especially about getting the bondholders on board.  In a story entitled"A Risky Bankruptcy Loons for GM", David Welch of Businessweek mentions still other obstacles to be overcome.

Bottom line, there are just too many different constituencies, some of which it may not be possible, and certainly hardly feasible, to reach and interact with before the filing.  If the proper groundwork is laid - and from the sounds of it, GM is finally almost out of denial about its options and ACTUALLY has started to explore the bankruptcy option in a meaningful way - two months would be an ambitious, but at least possible period of time to get through a prenegotiated (or as we're apparently calling it now, "surgical") bankruptcy.  But TWO WEEKS - i just don't see how.

As for Chrysler, does it even have enough any "good" assets that it could do the same thing? Based on press coverage, not likely.

UPDATE:  Well, both Chrysler and GM did file in NYC.  For the basic info about GM's filing, click here.