.jpg)
(AP Photo/Rick Bowmer, file) Timberline Dodge, Oregon
Friday Feb 5th, Judge Gonzalez of the Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York, in the Chrysler Bankruptcy case denied a Motion brought on behalf of over 70 of the former Chrysler Dealers to overturn the Rejection Order which stripped them of their franchises in the spring of 2009.
Led by Island Jeep’s James Anderer of New York, the dealers Motion would have reversed the decision which stripped 789 dealers, including Timberline Chrysler Dodge of Portland Or., of their franchise contracts during the bankruptcy and sale of Chrysler to Fiat. Anderer's argument rests primarily upon the fact that neither Fiat nor any other party to the sale of Chrysler, requested that the Chrysler Dealers lose their contracts. Fiat was given 20 Billion dollars by the US Federal Government out of TARP funds in order to finance the purchase, and indeed paid nothing for their new ownership of one of Americas biggest auto manufacturers.
During the Bankruptcy trial, Fiat executive Alfredo Altavilla testified directly that no restructuring of the dealership agreements needed to occur before the closing of the sale:
Q. If this transaction closes without an absolute requirement of a particular number of dealers that are being terminated, would Chrysler still go through with this deal — I mean, rather, would Fiat still go through with this deal?
A. The answer is that a restructure needs to occur. Whether it occurs before or after the closing of the deal is not a material difference.
Once the transaction closed, new owner Fiat could make the decision regarding which dealerships would close and which remained in business. However this is not what occurred. The Honorable Judge Gonzales entered into his final judgment a piece of testimony that did not exist, the infamous footnote 21.
"21 …Altavilla also responded affirmatively to a question regarding whether a dealership network needed to be restructured for the Fiat Transaction to close, stating that a “restructuring needs to occur.” - Footnote 21 Judge Gonzalez Opinion
Judge Gonzalez deliberately took Mr. Altavilla’s testimony out of the context in which it was given in this footnote, which was the basis for the Rejection Order which cost 40,000 American jobs and the loss of 789 businesses across the nation. Altavilla never testified that the restructuring needed to occur as a condition of the sale closing.
By failing to acknowledge the error of Footnote 21, Judge Gonzalez has committed a willful fraud upon the court, say Anderer’s attorneys James Pidgeon and Leo Donofrio, of the Law Office of Pidgeon & Donofrio
At his website Donofrio condemns Judge Gonzalez’ denial of Motion:
“In our original Motion memorandum we gave Judge Gonzalez the benefit of the doubt and refrained from calling this fraud intentional – opting instead to allege only that the Court’s judicial ventriloquism exhibited a reckless disregard for the truth.”
Donofrio further states:
… [I]in not correcting the error of Footnote 21, Judge Gonzalez is now also guilty of intentional fraud as well. He’s chosen to defend Footnote 21 and in doing so he is simply lying to the American People which is obvious to any impartial observer of the facts. Footnote 21 is simply a lie by a partial Judge. It’s fraud plain and simple."
Anderer and his attorneys claim that the dealers who had their franchises taken from them under the Bankruptcy Code Section 365 are now unsecured creditors and have a claim against the estate of Old Chrysler for what could amount to a billion dollars. Attorneys for Anderer argue that because no party at any time testified the dealer restructuring was necessary as a condition to the sale closing, the court was not justified in burdening the estate of Old Chrysler with such a potentially huge debt. All available evidence supports the disenfranchised dealers claim that Fiat was happy to take on all of the 3200 then existing dealerships in the sale, after all, it was entirely at no cost to them thanks to the TARP fund.
The Dealers will be appealing this decision made by Judge Gonzalez in what appears to be a case of Judicial Fraud. Anderer’s attorneys will appeal to the Southern District of New York and will be filing multiple complaints with the New York Bar association, asking for sanctions against Old Chrysler’s attorneys the Law Firm of Jones Day, and Judge Gonzalez.
Judicial activism is a violation of civil rights. Because of the power that the court can wield, the damage that it can do can be of monumental proportions, which is why this fraud from Judge Gonzalez is so egregious. An estimated 40,000 people lost their jobs and 789 Franchise dealers lost their businesses. Some of those dealers had been in business from the founding days of Chrysler in the 1920’s, generational businesses that had shown decades of loyalty to Chrysler.
Judge Gonzalez’ intentional decision not to correct the error of footnote 21 shows a wanton disregard for the truth and his mandated role as an impartial observer of the facts. The dealer restructuring made no material difference to Fiat. Why would it? Fiat got Chrysler for free.
Chrysler Dealers Motion Dismissed
For more info: Cars, quo warranto, and Obama (Update)(Update 2), Chrysler Dealers and attorneys Donofrio and Pidgeon file lawsuit in NYC (Update: Corrections), Corruption 101 - Funded by TARP - the legacy of the Chrysler bailout
Comments
Never mind that it wasn't a timely filing for reconsideration and the wrong court or an appeal.
And saying that this is some kind of civil rights issue simply makes a mockery of what Civil Rights actually are.
TTFN
WHAT ABOUT DA BIRFER STUFF, DI?
Sorry Dave, it is the right court. And the Dealers have a year to file appeals, its WELL under a year.
Where's the part in your article that explains that they were late in bringing action? Oh, skipped that part. Instead you say it's fraud.
"Dianna says:
Sorry Dave, it is the right court. And the Dealers have a year to file appeals, its WELL under a year.
February 8, 5:11 PM"
And yet the Courts Opinion says differently. I do believe that the Blog "Oh For Goodness Sake" provides a copy of the opinion. I suggest reading it.
What does this mean?
From the Court's Opinion:
"While the Movants argue that the Court overlooked certain facts and case law, they then cite to the Court’s reference to the same facts and cases in the Court’s Opinion. In other words, for the basis of what they allege the Court overlooked, the Movants cite to the Opinion itself."
Looking forward to your answer.
Where's the part in your article that explains that they were late in bringing action? Oh, skipped that part. Instead you say it's fraud.
Sorry for the duplicate. I don't know why it resent when I returned to this window.
**Sorry Dave, it is the right court. And the Dealers have a year to file appeals, its WELL under a year.**
You should be sorry. It was the right court for "Reconsideration" but way too late. Read the Court Rules and the opinion.
If they wanted to file an appeal, they wouldn't go to the same court, now, would they.
As for the so-called fraud? Sanctions may be in order on that one.
Diana - it appears you didn't read the ruling and are only going by what you've been told by Donofrio and Pidgeon. Acually, Judge Gonzalez spends a great deal of time explaining why the filing is past the deadline for filing an appeal. In fact, that appears to be one fo the main reasons he denied their Motion to Reconsider.
Sooo, no comment I see on the fact that the judge invented testimony? No comment regarding the possibility that this was merely an expected step in the Appeals process? No comment about getting this case out of the courtroom of the Judge that may have committed a fraud? No comments about these issues hum.... interesting the myopic views of some isn't it? :)
Yes, Dianna, and those myopic views have become oh-so-predictable. Fraud committed by one who is mandated to uphold the law? Clearly that is of no concern to some here.
The Judge clearly states in his Opinion that the fraud claim under Rule 60d was timely but the "mistake" claim under 60b was not. Ms. Cotter's article only dealt with the fraud claim. Also note that the Judge admitted the statute Rule 60b provides the Movants with 1 year to bring the Motion and they brought it in 6 months. The issue is much more complex than what people are writing here which is a good sign for the Movants and Donofrio Pidgeon. They have a wonderful shot on appeal as the US Supreme Court stated that 60b Motions have one year according to statute and that would make the Motion timels. Six months is certainly within one year.
Also note that Gonzalez was appointed Chief Justice last week. How convenient.
it sucks to be on the losing side of a case and the rhetoric is what would be expected. Anything short of a favorable ruling is conspiratorially linked. Typical !
This is a classic example of why I should have been a lawyer, can you imagine the fees ??
@ Lawyer 1
Thanks for your analysis.
Also Dianna,Thanks for following up on this.
This sounds like every other birther story. We meant to lose. This gets us to the next level.
Chalice said the same thing when her petition was dismissed.
Really, has Leo or Pidgeon discussed how to get past the fact that it was FIVE MONTHS TOO LATE?
Or, did the calendar commit fraud as well?
Does anybody know if any of their plaintiffs actually did file timely appeals? Because if they dropped them to join this thing, they may have grounds for a malpractice claim.
**Also note that Gonzalez was appointed Chief Justice last week. How convenient. **
No he wasn't. I'm guessing you never worked on a Banko before, Lawyer 1.
The truth is, Gonzalez was appointed Chief Judge of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.
And, not hugely off topic, Red State has banned Birthers from its site. I wonder how long Danae will take to squeal that her civil rights are being infringed upon. I can't wait for that convo.
Of coarse redstate.com banned those looking for the truth on the NBC and 911 issues. It's all part of their neocon push 2010. They want us to replace the libtards with neocons. Not gonna happen. I can't wait for the primaries where all the establishment candidates get bounced out. Do not vote for any establishment candidates. Get them out early!!!
From the transcript:
Q. Are you aware of what party-in-interest has required that
Chrysler reduce its dealer network by approximately twenty-five
percent?
A. This has been Chrysler's own determination.
Q. So, clearly, Fiat did not request this reduction, is that
correct?
A. No, no, as I said, we requested a restructuring of the
dealer network without indicating the size of that
restructuring.
Also:
Q. If this transaction closes without an absolute requirement
of a particular number of dealers that are being terminated,
would Chrysler still go through with this deal -- I mean,
rather, would Fiat still go through with this deal?
A. The answer is that a restructure needs to occur. Whether
it occurs before or after the closing of the deal is not a
material difference. I cannot indicate whether there is a
restructuring that would have been structured by NewCo without
being significantly different from the one that has been
implemented so far. As I said, Fiat and Chrysler did agree
(sic) the methodology for the selection of the dealer network.
We agreed on the seven criterias that should have been used,
and then I think that the number of dealers that have been
involved in the restructuring is coming out of the simple
application of this methodology. So we would have used the
same methodology because it's exactly the same that we use in
Europe. So --
Dianna - pretty clear that Fiat requested a restructuring. The number of dealers was left up to Chrysler using methodology determined by both Fiat and Chrysler.
Looks like no fraud, no invented testimony. Just the usual MO of parsing words out of context.
I would suggest you start on your article about judicial activism and how the courts are in the backpocket of big business and big government. That way you won't have to rush when the case is kicked out.
Have a good day. :)
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!