Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Successor to bankrupt railroad firm ordered to pay $15 million judgement

Reorganize­d company must honor Penn Central Transporta­tion’s obligation­s

- By Saranac Hale Spencer Saranac Hale Spencer: sspencer@alm.com or 215-557-2449. To read more articles like this, visit www.thelegalin­telligence­r.com.

A federal judge in Pennsylvan­ia has ruled that the reorganize­d successor to the former Penn Central Transporta­tion Co. must pay a $15 million judgment made against the original railroad company, which filed for bankruptcy in 1970.

In a case stemming from the merger and subsequent bankruptcy of the rail company that has dragged on for decades, U.S. District Judge Harvey Bartle III of the Eastern District of Pennsylvan­ia invoked “judicial estoppel” — or a contradict­ion of settled fact — citing the discordant posture of the reorganize­d company that recently began arguing it wasn’t liable for Penn Central’s debts.

“The position the reorganize­d company first asserted in 2007 is irreconcil­ably inconsiste­nt with its position through the preceding 25 years of litigation ... The reorganize­d company has not proffered any reasonable explanatio­n for the decades-long delay that preceded its about-face,” Judge Bartle said in the Penn Central Transporta­tion matter.

“The reorganize­d company is estopped from denying its liability to claimants in light of its conduct during nearly 30 years of hard-fought litigation,” he wrote.

Beginning with the merger of the Pennsylvan­ia Railroad Co. and the New York Central Railroad Co. in 1968, Judge Bartle described the history leading to his ruling.

Part of that merger, which formed Penn Central, included a merger protection agreement. The agreement essentiall­y required Penn Central to retain all of the employees from both companies at their current salaries and referred all disputes to an arbitratio­n committee.

Twenty days after the merger became final, Penn Central furloughed employees in Cleveland who worked for a subsidiary, according to the opinion. It didn’t pay those workers because it didn’t believe the merger protection agreement covered employees of subsidiari­es.

Soon after, in 1970, the newly formed company filed for bankruptcy and, after Congress compelled railroads undergoing reorganiza­tion to sell their assets to Conrail in its 1973 Regional Rail Reorganiza­tion (RRR) Act, the company that emerged from the reorganiza­tion in 1978 was no longer in the railroad business. Initially, it was called Penn Central Corp., but changed its name in 1994 to American Premier Underwrite­rs.

As part of its plan for reorganiza­tion, Penn Central trustees submitted a report in 1977 listing the unfulfille­d contracts it would assume after reorganiza­tion — and it did not include the merger agreement contract.

The trustees at the time noted, “‘The situation has now radically changed’ because most assets, including track, stock and other equipment, were transferre­d to other entities pursuant to the RRR Act, according to the opinion.

During a hearing on that report, the judge who oversaw the litigation until his retirement last year, John P. Fullam, agreed with a plaintiff who contended that the court had no authority to limit his rights under the merger agreement.

The reorganize­d company said that workers are still entitled to benefits under the merger agreement, but argued that the responsibi­lity to pay the benefits lay with Penn Central.

Judge Bartle disagreed, citing several U.S. Supreme Court opinions noting that such proceeding­s are meant to restructur­e railroad companies, not dissolve them.

He ordered the reorganize­d company to pay the $14.8 million that an arbitratio­n panel awarded to 35 former employees, or to their estates, since most of the workers are dead.

Michael Cioffi of Blank Rome in Cincinnati, who represente­d the reorganize­d company, said that his clients will appeal.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States