NOTE TO READERS: The defenders of the Chrysler rescue plan have been filing their responses to the pleas to halt the sale while the Supreme Court reviews its legality.  This post, with links to all of the coverage, will remain at the top of the blog through Sunday evening.  One new post has been added, discussing “key points made by the plan’s defenders.” It will incorporate the responses as they come in, and thus will be updated as needed.

The actual filings from the defenders will be linked in this post, rather than below.  The first response is from the United Auto Workers union, and other members of a committee of creditors whose claims are not secured.  It can be downloaded here.  The second response is from Chrysler, and it can be found here.  The Treasury is expected to file its own response; the time for that is uncertain.

An earlier update, with the third stay application, is just below, followed by the array of links to the various posts.

———–

UPDATED 6:05 p.m.  A third application to delay the Chrysler sale has been filed at the Supreme Court, on behalf of a woman who is suing Chrysler for damages, claiming that her husband died from lung cancer due to exposure to asbestos while working on auto brakes. Her lawsuit in state court in California will be scuttled if the sale occurs, she argued. Her application can be found here.

Following are links to this blog’s discussions of the developments of Saturday night and Sunday, with access to the documents involved:

* The lower court’s actions (found here).

* The applications to delay the Chrysler deal (here).

* The key points in the challenges (here).  UPDATED

* The key points of the plan’s defenders (here).      NEW and UPDATED

* The problem of “standing” to challenge Treasury’s role (here).

* The ban on future auto accident lawsuits (here).  UPDATED

Posted in Uncategorized