This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P, a trucking company, had a collective bargaining agreement with D. After filing Chapter 11, P sought to reject that agreement. The court found that rejection of the agreement was 'absolutely necessary to save the debtor from collapse.' New agreements were negotiated to the satisfaction of each participating local union. Those agreements have been implemented over the lone dissent of D. On implementation, P was able to record monthly profits in the range of $125,000 to $250,000. The new agreements achieved these results by reducing wages and requiring employees to buy their own trucking equipment, which the employees then leased to the company. The reorganization plan contains twelve classes. D opposed the plan in that P impermissibly gerrymandered the classes to neutralize D’s dissenting vote. The court approved the plan, and D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.