Studebaker Corporation v. Allied Products Corporation, 256 F. Supp. 173 (W.D. Mich. 1966)

[Scott]

This is a fascinating read and analysis of a legal case at the very end of Studebaker production. I don't understand all the proxy stuff, but the insight into board politics, takeovers and bank connections is interesting. Maybe Stu knows something of this case. I'm curious why Studebaker is called a Michigan corporation. I thought the actual corporation was in a different state (not Indiana).

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/256/173/2349380/

[StudeRich]

That is interesting stuff, unfortunately it would take a Law trained person to fully understand the meanings of some of those actions and meetings by individuals, Law Firms and Corporations. Really HEAVY stuff, over my head.

I did note that Richard Nixon was on one of the Law firms just like mentioned in the Nixon Movie where he goes to the Auto Show and sees the New '64 Models on display. Mainly my friend Stan Haveriland's beautiful Jet Green '64 GT Hawk.

The Producers of the Movie may have taken "writers licence" with some of the dates though, because that Show would have been in Sept. 1963.

[8E45E]

What I get out of that is Allied Stamping purchased their one building with all the presses, on the premise that Studebaker was going to continue assembling cars in Hamilton beyond 1966, and Allied would have been the supplier of body panels.

Of course Allied Stamping did produce various body panels for Ford up into the 1990's in South Bend, and I did go through that plant in 2002 after it closed. It was interesting to read there was an actual tie-in between Allied and Studebaker; not just a 'We're the seller; you're the buyer' real estate transaction as was the case with South Bend Lathe purchasing the Engineering Building.

Craig

[Warren Webb]

This is a fascinating read and analysis of a legal case at the very end of Studebaker production. I'm curious why Studebaker is called a Michigan corporation. I thought the actual corporation was in a different state (not Indiana).

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/...6/173/2349380/

During my only visit (so far) to South Bend I couldn't help but see that part of the old plant was being used by Allied Stamping. Based on news reports at the time of closing of South Bend I was under the impression that Budd (based in Philadelphia) had taken over stamping for Studebaker. This made sense due to Budd previously had supplied floor & roof stampings to Studebaker due to their size. Now we see that Allied was a player. This makes me wonder if Allied was being prevented from acquiring Studebaker stock, that the possible "untimely damage" to the deck lid stamping dies were a payback for resisting the merger? Although not stated directly it may have been the reason for Studebaker to take such action.

As far as the corporation being a "Michigan" corporation it no doubt goes back to 1954 when Packard purchased Studebaker thus Packard, the lead company was most likely already a Michigan corporation.

[56Golden]

During my only visit (so far) to South Bend I couldn't help but see that part of the old plant was being used by Allied Stamping. Based on news reports at the time of closing of South Bend I was under the impression that Budd (based in Philadelphia) had taken over stamping for Studebaker. This made sense due to Budd previously had supplied floor & roof stampings to Studebaker due to their size. Now we see that Allied was a player. This makes me wonder if Allied was being prevented from acquiring Studebaker stock, that the possible "untimely damage" to the deck lid stamping dies were a payback for resisting the merger? Although not stated directly it may have been the reason for Studebaker to take such action.

Allied Stamping’s operation in South Bend was primarily for Ford with some for Chrysler. They did not even do stampings for Kaiser Jeep/AM General who was busy assembling vehicles a mile right down the street.