Judge approves American Airlines' bankruptcy plan
DALLAS — A federal judge has approved American Airlines' plan to emerge from bankruptcy protection and merge with US Airways, although the airlines must resolve a lawsuit filed by the federal government seeking to block the merger.
A trial over that lawsuit is scheduled for November.
The ruling Thursday by federal bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane in New York could restore a sense of momentum for the merger.
“The judge's ruling today shows that American is heading in the right direction,” said Mike Trevino, a spokesman for American's parent company, AMR Corp. He called it a milestone in AMR's turnaround since filing for bankruptcy protection in 2011.
The airlines had hoped to close the merger this month and form the world's biggest carrier. They're now shooting for the end of the year, if they can settle the antitrust lawsuit with the Justice Department or win the case in court.
Shares of AMR, based in Fort Worth, Texas, rose 18 cents, or 5.1 percent, to $3.69 in over-the-counter trading Thursday afternoon. Shares of Tempe, Ariz.-based US Airways Group Inc. slipped 4 cents to $17.68.
AMR lawyers had argued against delaying approval of the bankruptcy plan, saying that would put ongoing support for the merger at risk.
Lane said that if the airlines lose the antitrust case, AMR will have to write a restructuring plan that doesn't include the merger. If the airlines settle with the Justice Department, Lane would review terms of the settlement.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- MSA Safety products in demand to protect workers in dangerous jobs
- U.S. Steel warns it may lay off almost 2,000 workers in Alabama, Texas
- Emergency room visits decline as navigators steer patients to proper medical care
- Drillers bid millions for oil, gas beneath West Virginia public lands
- Energy companies vie for experienced workers with skills in high demand
- Shale sector won’t gut area workforce
- Chevron laying off 162 workers from Moon-based unit
- Energy-saving tactics pay off in Green Workplace Challenge
- Drops in gasoline prices won’t likely last, analysts say
- Milk industry swats back at ‘anti-dairy’ trend
- Energy industry says it’s on top of methane leaks, but environmentalists want oversight