Nos.

14-1208, 14-1209, 14-1211, 14-1212, 14-1213, 14-1214, 14-1215

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
__________

IN RE: CITY OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN,
Debtor in Possession.
______

POLICE AND FIRE RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF DETROIT, ET
AL.,
Appellants
v.

CITY OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN,
Appellee

__________
On Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District
of Michigan (Hon. Steven W. Rhodes)
__________
THE CITY OF DETROITS CONDITIONAL MOTION TO POSTPONE
ORAL ARGUMENT
__________
David G. Heiman
Heather Lennox
JONES DAY
North Point, 901 Lakeside Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44114
Telephone: (216) 586-3939
Facsimile: (216) 579-0212
dgheiman@jonesday.com
hlennox@jonesday.com


Beth Heifetz
JONES DAY
51 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: (202) 879-3939
Facsimile: (202) 626-1700
bheifetz@jonesday.com



Attorneys for the City of Detroit

Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 1



On July 1, 2014, this Court scheduled oral argument in these consolidated
appeals for July 30, 2014. The City of Detroit hereby moves to postpone argument
conditioned on the two classes of the Citys pension claimants voting in favor of
the Citys proposed plan of adjustment.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The appeals presently pending before this Court challenge the Citys
eligibility to be a debtor under Chapter 9 of the Bankruptcy Code. As the Court
knows, however, the Citys underlying bankruptcy case has proceeded apace
during the pendency of these appeals. The City has now proposed its Fourth
Amended Plan for the Adjustment of Debts of the City of Detroit, Dkt. 4392,
1
and
a significant number of the Citys major creditor constituencies have agreed to
support the Plan.
As relevant here, the City has reached agreements or agreements in principle
with a large majority of the Appellants: the Police and Fire Retirement System, the
General Retirement System, the Official Committee of Retirees, Michigan Council
25 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-
CIO, Sub-Chapter 98, City of Detroit Retirees, the Retired Detroit Police and Fire
Fighters Association, the Detroit Retired City Employees Association, Donald

1
All docket references are to the Bankruptcy Courts docket, In re City of
Detroit, Michigan, No. 13-53846 (Bankr. E.D. Mich.).
Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 2

2

Taylor, Shirley V. Lightsey, the Detroit Police Command Officers Association,
and the International Union, UAW have all agreed to support the Citys proposed
treatment of pension and retiree benefit claims.
The proposed treatment of those claims, however, is ultimately conditioned
on these Appellants willingness to stop litigating the question of the Citys
eligibility to be a Chapter 9 debtor. For example, pursuant to the State of
Michigans contribution agreement, its obligation to provide outside funding to
help fund retiree pensions is conditioned on the [c]essation of all litigation . . .
seeking to enforce Article IX, Section 24 of the Michigan Constitution [the
Pensions Clause]. Fourth Amended Plan, Dkt. 4392, Exh. I.A.268, at 4(c); see
also id. at 4(d) (conditioning State funding on [a]ctive support of the Plan . . .
and an agreement not to support . . . the litigation described in subparagraph 4(c)
by certain listed parties).
2

Additionally, other than the UAW, these Appellants have stipulated that
they or the City may seek a stay of oral argument in the Sixth Circuit Appeals.
Order Approving the Stipulation Modifying Certain Deadlines Established in the

2
As relevant here, that list includes the General Retirement System, the
Police and Fire Retirement System, AFSCME, the UAW, the Detroit Police
Officers Association, the Detroit Police Command Officers Association, the
Detroit Fire Fighters Association, the Retired Detroit Police and Fire Fighters
Association, the Retired Detroit Police Members Association, the Detroit Retired
City Employees Association, and the Official Committee of Retirees. See id. at
Exh. C.
Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 3

3

Fourth Amended Order Establishing Procedures, Deadlines and Hearing Dates
Relating to the Debtors Plan of Adjustment (Stipulation), Dkt. 4587, Exh. A, at
11; see also Order Approving the First Amended Stipulation Modifying Certain
Plan Discovery and Pleading Deadlines for Certain Non-Debtor Parties (Amended
Stipulation), Dkt. 5482, Exh. A, at Recital F (noting that certain conditions to the
initial Stipulation had been or would soon be satisfied).
3

These agreements and agreements in principle, however, are all conditioned
on the two classes of pension claimants voting in favor of the treatment of their
pension claims under the Plan. These claimants are currently voting, but the voting
period ends on July 11 and the official results should be filed with the Bankruptcy
Court by July 21. See Fifth Amended Order Establishing Procedures, Deadlines
and Hearing Dates Relating to the Debtors Plan of Adjustment, Dkt. 5259, at 6,
10. After that, the Bankruptcy Court is scheduled to hold a confirmation trial
regarding the Plan from August 14, 2014 to September 23, 2014. See id. at 17.

3
The Citys separate stipulations with the UAW do not specifically address
the UAWs appeal, though they do indicate that the UAW will not object to the
Plan if the two classes of pension claimants vote in favor of it. See Order
Approving the Stipulation Modifying Certain Deadlines Established in the Fourth
Amended Order Establishing Procedures, Deadlines and Hearing Dates Relating to
the Debtors Plan of Adjustment, Dkt. 4590, Exh. A, 14; see also Order
Further Modifying Certain Deadlines Approved by Corrected Order Modifying
Certain Deadlines Relating to the Debtors Plan of Adjustment, Dkt. 5499, at 1
4.
Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 4

4

GROUNDS FOR CONDITIONAL RELIEF
Pursuant to this Courts Rule 34(d), a motion to postpone oral argument may
be granted for good cause. If the two classes of pension claimants vote in favor
of the Plans treatment of their claims, there will be good cause to postpone oral
argument.
4
In that scenario, the great majority of Appellants must agree to cease
litigating in order to trigger the States obligation to provide outside funds. See
Fourth Amended Plan, Dkt. 4392, Exh. I.A.268, at 4(c); see also id. at 4(d). In
that scenario, the great majority of Appellants have also already agreed to let the
City seek a stay of oral argument in the eligibility appeals. Stipulation at 11.
There is no need to hold oral argument for parties that have decided to put their
appeals in abeyance pending confirmation of a consensual plan of adjustment.
To be sure, the City has not yet reached an accord with three Appellants
the Retired Detroit Police Members Association, the Detroit Fire Fighters
Association , and the Detroit Police Officers Association. Nonetheless, if the two
classes of pension claimants vote to accept the Plan, this Court should still
postpone argument. To begin with, the City continues to negotiate with two of
these groups, the Detroit Fire Fighters Association and the Detroit Police Officers
Association. It hopes to reach an agreement with them as it has with so many

4
The City will inform the Court of the results of the vote as soon as possible.
If the two classes of pension claimants reject the Plan, the City agrees that oral
argument should remain scheduled for July 30.
Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 5

5

others, and postponing argument would give the parties the time needed to
continue their efforts toward a consensual resolution.
Moreover, postponing argument also makes sense even if the City is not able
to reach agreements with all of the remaining Appellants. The character of oral
argument will differ dramatically depending on whether or not the pension
claimants accept the Plan. The Retired Detroit Police Members Association did
not join any of the other Appellants arguments, see Opening Br. of RDPMA in
No. 14-1215, and the Detroit Fire Fighters Association and Detroit Police Officers
Association (who filed a joint brief along with one of the settling parties) joined
only specific arguments, see Opening Br. of DFFA, DPOA, and DPCOA in No.
14-1214, at 1011 (adopting only AFSCMEs as-applied constitutional challenge
to the discharge of pensions in Chapter 9, the Retirement Systems Pensions
Clause arguments, and AFSCMEs impracticability and good faith arguments). As
a result, if the two classes of pension claimants vote in favor of the Plan, many of
the issues raised by other parties on appealsuch as the facial constitutionality of
Chapter 9, see Br. of AFSCME in No. 14-1211, at 1531, and the preclusive effect
of certain state trial court litigation, see Br. of Detroit Retirement Systems in No.
14-1208, at 3247will no longer be before the Court. Even with respect to broad
topics that remain alive, the Appellants will have waived arguments contained in
other briefs that they did not join. Postponing argument could thus save the Court
Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 6

6

and the parties from a considerable amount of unnecessary preparation and allow
everyone to focus their efforts on the questions (if any) still presented by the
appeals.
5

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the City asks the Court to postpone oral argument
if the Citys two classes of pension claimants vote in favor of the Plan.

5
Under Sixth Circuit Rule 34(d), a motion for postponement must state
where possible the consent or objection of other counsel. The City informed the
Appellants of its intent to file this conditional motion on July 2 and asked them to
respond by July 3 in order to file this motion as quickly as possible. As of that
time, the City had received the following responses. The Retiree Association
Parties (the Retired Detroit Police and Fire Fighters Association and the Detroit
Retired City Employees Association) will likely be filing papers with the Court
stating their agreement with adjourning oral argument if and only if the two classes
of retiree claimants vote in favor of the Plan. The Official Committee of Retirees
does not join the motion but will support postponement in the event the two classes
of claimants vote in favor of the Plan. The Retirement Systems intend to file
papers addressing the issue promptly next week. AFSCME takes no position on
the Citys motion at this time. The Retired Detroit Police Members Association
does not concur at this point.
Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 7

7

Dated: July 3, 2014

David G. Heiman
Heather Lennox
JONES DAY
North Point, 901 Lakeside Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44114
Telephone: (216) 586-3939
Facsimile: (216) 579-0212
dgheiman@jonesday.com
hlennox@jonesday.com


Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Beth Heifetz
Beth Heifetz
JONES DAY
51 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: (202) 879-3939
Facsimile: (202) 626-1700
bheifetz@jonesday.com

Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 8


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on July 3, 2014, I filed the foregoing City of Detroits
Conditional Motion To Postpone Oral Argument on the Courts CM-ECF system,
which caused it to be served on all parties or their counsel.


/s/ Beth Heifetz
Beth Heifetz
Counsel for the City of Detroit

Case: 14-1208 Document: 70 Filed: 07/03/2014 Page: 9