Get 40% Off
👀 👁 🧿 All eyes on Biogen, up +4,56% after posting earnings. Our AI picked it in March 2024.
Which stocks will surge next?
Unlock AI-picked Stocks

U.S. court says JPMorgan must live with $1.5 billion paperwork error

Published 01/21/2015, 01:15 PM
Updated 01/21/2015, 01:20 PM
© Reuters. JP Morgan Chase & Co sign outside headquarters in New York

By Tom Hals

(Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase & Co got a painful reminder on Wednesday that we all have to live with our mistakes, even a clerical mix-up that could cost $1.5 billion.

A federal appeals court in Manhattan ruled on Wednesday that, although it was not JPMorgan's intention, it clearly authorized its law firm to file papers in 2008 that unsecured much of a loan to General Motors.

The difference was critical because the automaker soon after filed for bankruptcy. During GM's Chapter 11, secured lenders were repaid in full while unsecured creditors lost out.

JPMorgan said it was reviewing the decision and its options.

The dispute involved the unintentional release of a lien on GM fixtures and equipment. At the end of 2008, the automaker was preparing to pay off a $300 million financing and had the Mayer Brown law firm ready the documents. The firm accidentally included a lien that secured the $1.5 billion loan in the list of security interests it terminated after the $300 million was repaid.

After GM filed for bankruptcy protection in 2009, the official committee of unsecured creditors asked a judge to rule that the $1.5 billion syndicated loan administered by JPMorgan was unsecured because of the mistake. JPMorgan argued the loan's security interest was unintentionally terminated and was therefore still in effect.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert Gerber sided with JPMorgan in 2013. He said that, while it was "initially tempting" to doom lenders to "live with their mistakes," he found JPMorgan had not expressly authorized the termination of the loan's security interest.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

The unsecured creditors appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan, which reversed Gerber's ruling. The three judge panel found that, while "JPMorgan never intended to terminate the main term loan" security interest, the bank had effectively given its authorization.

The appeals court noted that the filings ending the security interest were reviewed by the JPMorgan managing director responsible for the $1.5 billion loan and the law firm JPMorgan hired for the paperwork, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.

"JPMorgan reviewed and assented to the filing of that statement. Nothing more is needed," the 15-page opinion said.

Eric Fisher, an attorney for the unsecured creditors, declined to comment.

JP Morgan Chase & Co sign outside headquarters in New York" alt="© Reuters. JP Morgan Chase & Co sign outside headquarters in New York" rel="external-image">

The case is the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Motors Liquidation Co v JPMorgan Chase Bank, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 13-2187.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.