Chrysler made the difficult (and controversial) decision in 2009 to close 789 dealerships leading up to the automaker's abbreviated bankruptcy. The move helped Chrysler eliminate some redundancies and limit in-brand competition, but many of the dealers who lost their franchises weren't at all pleased with the move.

It didn't take long for many of those dealers to sue Chrysler for the right to stay in business, and the court cases are still being settled in 2012. The Detroit News is reporting that a federal judge has ruled that Chrysler doesn't have to immediately reinstate eight dealers suing for the right to reopen their doors.

The eight dealers are among 82 that received arbitration after the forced closings. Fifty of those dealers were offered arbitration by Chrysler and another 32 retail outlets won arbitration in court. The arbitration didn't give those dealers the rights to re-open immediately, but it does set up boundaries to discuss agreeable terms for reopening.

While Chrysler can probably count this decision as a victory of sorts, the automaker still has 11 more lawsuits from U.S. dealers. So far, only 43 of the 789 dealers have been fully reinstated, and another 14 are still negotiating.

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 3 Years Ago
      Can someone please explain dealer franchise laws to me? I don't quite understand how anyone can demand that Chrysler give them cars to sell.
        • 3 Years Ago
        Basically, those dealerships had contracts with Chrysler stating that Chrysler would provide them with cars to sell. Chrysler breaking those contracts without adequate compensation put those dealerships in a world of hurt, and since the government acquired a large hunk of Chrysler it becomes an eminent domain issue as well.
          • 3 Years Ago
          The government never acquired a large chunk of Chrysler. It made them loans. Also the dealer franchise laws have long ago in most cases, retroactively redefined by state laws passed by politicians sympathetic to the dealer. Essentially defanging any recourse automakers had against poor dealer practices. How a state can get away rewriting contracts to benefit one group of in state people at the expense of out of state people is beyond me. So I have no sympathy for most of these dealers because if Chrysler had some recourse against its bad dealerships over the past 40 years, they may never had needed to bankrupt.
        • 3 Years Ago
        They can demand it if Chrysler entered into an agreement to provide them.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Too bad they still have to reinstate their drugged workers.
        Jason Allen
        • 3 Years Ago
        We all have to read your drugged opinions, eh? Too bad? Maybe. :)
      • 3 Years Ago
      Ok, so I am still confused. Dealers who have faithfully sold Chrysler cars for years, made tons of money for Chrysler, employed thousands of sales people, mechanics and technicians at the dealerships are left to hang and stripped of their lively hood along with all the people who put all their retirement money in stock in this company all tao be taken away and made worthless at the hands of one man who got elected to run the country/car companies and help his union allies? oh yeah, good job! Guess thats why so many of us Americans will never buy a Chrystler or GM product again.....sad how Americans have been screwed over, at the hands of a union loving man. so sad!