In re Waltham Watch Co.

97 F. Supp. 189, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4274
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Waltham Watch Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 92 F. Supp. 871
District Court, D. Massachusetts·Decided May 1, 1951·No. No. 121-50·Published

Opinion

SWEENEY, Chief Judge.

I have today directed the entry of an order finding the Trustees’ amended Plan of Reorganization dated as of April 16, 1951, fair, equitable and feasible and directing that it be submitted to the parties [190]*190in interest herein for obtaining the consents required under Chapter X.

A brief narrative of the course of the proceedings herein is desirable, and is indeed almost necessary, in order that creditors and voting trust certificate holders may have the facts before them in casting their ballots.

The business conducted by Waltham Watch Company, the Debtor, was founded in 1850. It was among the pioneers in the development of mass production of jeweled watches, and for many years was among the leaders in the industry. Persons trained in its factory have gone on to develop similar enterprises in this country, and many of the founders of the modern Swiss watchmaking business obtained their skills by working in the Debtor’s plant. Waltham watches have been well and favorably known for generations. During World War I and World War II the Debt- or played an important part in manufacturing timing and precision mechanisms for this country and its allies. Its business is regarded by those charged with the duty of providing for the defense of the United States as being essential for that defense.

Accordingly when in the closing days of 1948 the Debtor decided to seek the aid of this court in order to effect a reorganization under the provisions of Chapter X of the Bankruptcy Act, this Court immediately approved the petition, and appointed three wholly disinterested persons as Trustees, in whose character, judgment and ability the Court had complete confidence.

It is not necessary to recite in detail the course of the 1948 proceedings, since we are here concerned with the reorganization of the Debtor under the second petition filed on February 3, 1950. It should, however, be noted that with a degree of diligence which has rarely been equaled in a matter of this kind, the Disinterested Trustees in the first reorganization proceeding completed all of the necessary steps so that a plan was proposed by them within a few months after their appointment, it received the necessary consents within five months and was confirmed by an order of this Court entered June 10, 1949, and consummated September 23, 1949. This reorganization accomplished the following principal results:

(1) The Trustees obtained a discount of $1,060,000 upon the claims of certain banks which held secured claims of $4,310,000 paying the banks $3,250,000 to extinguish their claims.

(2) There was a further reduction of about $4,000,000 in the Debtor’s debt structure by the conversion of its debentures upon which approximately $4,000,000 of principal and interest was due into slightly less than 1,000,000 shares of $1 par value of common stock.

(3) Priority creditors were paid in full.

(4) Unsecured creditors received 50% of their claims in cash and the other 50% in stock at par. This stock has generally sold for more than par, and as of the date of this Opinion it is selling for about twice par.

(5) There was obtained from RFC a ten-year 4% loan which for all practical purposes was in the amount of $4,000,000. A further sum of $2,000,000 authorized and earmarked for the purchase of machinery was never loaned.

(6) After payment of the sums necessary to provide a reserve for the payment of creditors and bankruptcy expenses, the company had about $2,000,000 available to it as the net proceeds of the RFC loan.

(7) The Trustees obtained the services of Teviah Sachs, an experienced and competent person in the field of watch manufacture, as Vice President in charge of sales.

(8) The President and General Manager of the company was John J. Hagerty, who had been manager of the Boston Agency of RFC, and who the Trustees believed had the necessary qualities to head the reorganized company.

(9) The Trustees had engaged a leading firm of industrial engineers to survey the operations, management and prospects of the company.

It was clear therefore that, if competently managed, the company had a reasonable prospect of success. The Disinterested Trustees appointed by the Court ceased to [191]*191have anything to do with the operations of the company on September 23, 1949.

Unfortunately differences in internal management developed almost immediately after September 23, 1949. There also appears to have been a misunderstanding between the management of the company and RFC as a result of which the company based its policy and plans upon the expectation of getting a further loan of $3,000,000 from RFC which it believed RFC had agreed to grant. As a result, when on January 28, 1930, RFC informed the company that it would not make this further loan, the company found itself with a heavy inventory and no cash. The company therefore filed the second petition under Chapter X on February 3, 1950. This is the petition upon which the present proceedings are based.

When this petition was presented to me for approval on February 3, 1950, I hesitated about approving it, and withheld approval until I had had an opportunity to consider whether the differences between the Debtor and RFC could be resolved, and whether there was any reasonable prospect that the Debtor could be successfully reorganized. Among the circumstances which made me hesitate were the following: — All of the assets of the company of any consequence were subject to a lieu to secure the RFC loan of $4,000,000. RFC was in fact in possession of all of these assets under a claim of default, as a result of which it had also declared the whole $4,000,000 loan immediately due. While the Debtor claimed that its assets were worth more than the amount due RFC, the latter claimed that they were not. The fact that the company was compelled to file a second petition for reorganization within approximately four months from the time that it had emerged from the first reorganization proceedings rendered the prospect of a second and successful reorganization more difficult.

The quoted prices of the company’s stock reflected this doubt. During the closing days of 1949 the stock (represented by Voting Trust Certificates) was quoted at about 1 y8 on the New York Curb Exchange. During the week ending February 3, the week in which the petition was filed, it fell to i- e., 25 cents per share.

On February 28, 1950, I accepted the petition, thus affording the Debtor another opportunity to reorganize under Chapter X. I was led to that decision by the opinion that there was a chance, even though remote, that the company could be successfully reorganized; that the causes which had led to the breakdown after the first reorganization were not irremediable; that the company was an important economic factor in the City of Waltham; and above all that it was highly essential as a link in the national defense at a time when war clouds were gathering. On February 9, 1950, the Chairman of the War Munitions Board wrote a letter to RFC which reaffirmed the views of the Munitions Board as to the importance of the maintenance of the Waltham Watch Company as a link in the defense of this country. This letter reads as follows:—

“February 9, 1950
“Dear Mr. Hise:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Waltham Watch Co., 97 F. Supp. 189, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4274 (D. Mass. 1951).

97 F. Supp. 189 (In re Waltham Watch Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related