Litigation	3 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2015
Litigation [Abstract]
Litigation	15. Litigation In May 2011, the Company purchased (i) all of the outstanding equity of Fenwick Automotive Products Limited (“FAPL”), (ii) all of the outstanding equity of Introcan, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Introcan”), and (iii) 1% of the outstanding equity of Fapco S.A. de C.V., a Mexican variable capital company (“Fapco”) (collectively, “Fenco” and also referred to herein as the “discontinued subsidiary”). Since FAPL owned 99% of Fapco prior to these acquisitions, the Company owned 100% of Fapco following these transactions. On June 10, 2013, each of FAPL, Introcan and Introcan’s subsidiaries, Flo-Pro Inc., LH Distribution Inc., Rafko Logistics Inc., Rafko Holdings Inc. and Rafko Enterprises Inc. (collectively, the “Fenco Entities”), filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 7 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. There have been and may be claims filed against the Company by the trustee and some or all of the creditors in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings involving the Fenco Entities. In February 2015, M&T Bank filed a complaint in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles, against the Company and some of its executives alleging negligent misrepresentation, tortious interference with contractual relationship, conspiracy, unjust enrichment, conversion, declaratory judgment/alter ego, breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The plaintiff is seeking unspecified damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and other relief. Pending motions to stay or dismiss this litigation, or portions thereof, are scheduled to be heard in October 2015. M&T Bank also filed a similar complaint for oppression under Canadian law and similar damages in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. In addition, the trustee has notified the Company and its insurance companies that the trustee may have claims for wrongful acts, breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, aiding and abetting, negligence and conversion against MPA and its executive officers, but has not filed any litigation at this time. A tolling agreement has been entered into with the trustee and expires in September 2015. Any litigation to determine the validity of these claims involving the Fenco Entities by M&T Bank and the trustee, regardless of its merit or resolution, may be costly and time consuming and divert the efforts and attention of the Company’s management from its business strategy. Any adverse judgment or settlement by the Company and its executive officers of these claims could also result in significant additional expense which could be material to the Company’s financial operations and future results of operations. The Company is also a defendant in the following cases: one in Ontario Superior Court and another in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. In each case the plaintiffs’ claim that the Company is liable for amounts due from the Fenco Entities to their employees under applicable U.S. and Canadian law. The Company has resolved these matters, subject to court approvals, for a cash payment, substantially all of which was previously accrued. The Company is also subject to various other lawsuits and claims in the normal course of business. Management does not believe that the outcome of these other matters will have a material adverse effect on its financial position or future results of operations.

15. Litigation

In May 2011, the Company purchased (i) all of the outstanding equity of Fenwick Automotive Products Limited (“FAPL”), (ii) all of the outstanding equity of Introcan, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Introcan”), and (iii) 1% of the outstanding equity of Fapco S.A. de C.V., a Mexican variable capital company (“Fapco”) (collectively, “Fenco” and also referred to herein as the “discontinued subsidiary”). Since FAPL owned 99% of Fapco prior to these acquisitions, the Company owned 100% of Fapco following these transactions.

On June 10, 2013, each of FAPL, Introcan and Introcan’s subsidiaries, Flo-Pro Inc., LH Distribution Inc., Rafko Logistics Inc., Rafko Holdings Inc. and Rafko Enterprises Inc. (collectively, the “Fenco Entities”), filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 7 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.

There have been and may be claims filed against the Company by the trustee and some or all of the creditors in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings involving the Fenco Entities.

In February 2015, M&T Bank filed a complaint in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles, against the Company and some of its executives alleging negligent misrepresentation, tortious interference with contractual relationship, conspiracy, unjust enrichment, conversion, declaratory judgment/alter ego, breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The plaintiff is seeking unspecified damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and other relief. Pending motions to stay or dismiss this litigation, or portions thereof, are scheduled to be heard in October 2015. M&T Bank also filed a similar complaint for oppression under Canadian law and similar damages in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

In addition, the trustee has notified the Company and its insurance companies that the trustee may have claims for wrongful acts, breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, aiding and abetting, negligence and conversion against MPA and its executive officers, but has not filed any litigation at this time. A tolling agreement has been entered into with the trustee and expires in September 2015.

Any litigation to determine the validity of these claims involving the Fenco Entities by M&T Bank and the trustee, regardless of its merit or resolution, may be costly and time consuming and divert the efforts and attention of the Company’s management from its business strategy. Any adverse judgment or settlement by the Company and its executive officers of these claims could also result in significant additional expense which could be material to the Company’s financial operations and future results of operations.

The Company is also a defendant in the following cases: one in Ontario Superior Court and another in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. In each case the plaintiffs’ claim that the Company is liable for amounts due from the Fenco Entities to their employees under applicable U.S. and Canadian law. The Company has resolved these matters, subject to court approvals, for a cash payment, substantially all of which was previously accrued.

The Company is also subject to various other lawsuits and claims in the normal course of business. Management does not believe that the outcome of these other matters will have a material adverse effect on its financial position or future results of operations.