GM reached deal with crash victims

Dan Gordon and Richard Baehr
The New York Times reports that GM reached a deal that preserves product liability claims on pre-bankruptcy manufactured vehicles, that arise after GM emerges from bankruptcy.  Previously filed crash victim claims and dealership complaints, according to the NYT report, are not part of the deal.  
According to the NYT, products liability claims are normally left behind in bankruptcies, as they were in Chrysler.  The NYT piece says that the motivation for the agreement is the "murky" caselaw and the larger size of the GM bankruptcy.  I assume the reporter is alluding to the June 18th Travelers v. Bailey opinion involving successor liability claims in asbestos/bankruptcy cases.
 
Although the NYT mentioned that the WSJ and the Washington Post reported on the matter, the NYT left out the WSJ  reports that key Obama Administration political allies, including the Maryland Attorney General, were advocating on behalf of the crash victims.  The NYT merely reported that more than twelve state attorneys general objected to the plan to leave product liability and dealership claims to be paid out of old GM.  TheWashington Post, which sometimes has a little more moxie than the NYT, also punted on the issue. 

The NYT, of course, can't be expected to report on anything that might taint the pristine image it photoshops in its daily Obama uploads.
The New York Times reports that GM reached a deal that preserves product liability claims on pre-bankruptcy manufactured vehicles, that arise after GM emerges from bankruptcy.  Previously filed crash victim claims and dealership complaints, according to the NYT report, are not part of the deal.  
According to the NYT, products liability claims are normally left behind in bankruptcies, as they were in Chrysler.  The NYT piece says that the motivation for the agreement is the "murky" caselaw and the larger size of the GM bankruptcy.  I assume the reporter is alluding to the June 18th Travelers v. Bailey opinion involving successor liability claims in asbestos/bankruptcy cases.
 
Although the NYT mentioned that the WSJ and the Washington Post reported on the matter, the NYT left out the WSJ  reports that key Obama Administration political allies, including the Maryland Attorney General, were advocating on behalf of the crash victims.  The NYT merely reported that more than twelve state attorneys general objected to the plan to leave product liability and dealership claims to be paid out of old GM.  TheWashington Post, which sometimes has a little more moxie than the NYT, also punted on the issue. 

The NYT, of course, can't be expected to report on anything that might taint the pristine image it photoshops in its daily Obama uploads.