1:84-F-00613•IN RE: General Motors 1980 X-Body Car Braking Systems Warranty Litigation
IN RE: General Motors 1980 X-Body Car Braking Systems Warranty Litigation
1:84-F-00613Jpml1 juin 2015
Texte intégral
| . Case MDL No. 613 Document 10 Filed 06/01/15 Page 1 of3: - ’ “ . - .-.JUL TEAL ey LT TT i IEE @ | KOU26 0Po ZT Sette DOCKET NO. 613 "BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION IN RE GENERAL MOTORS 1980 X-BODY CAR BRAKING SYSTEMS WARRANTY LITIGATION TRANSFER ORDER#* This litigation consists of two actions, one action each in ; the District of the District of Columbia and the District of New Jersey. Before the Panel is a motion by the General Motors Corporation (General Motors) to centraiize the actions in a : single district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. Generai Motors suggests that the District of the District of Columbia is the appropriate transferee forum. The plaintiff in the action pending in the District of the District of Columbia (the D.C. plaintiff) takes no position on the merits of the Section 1407 motion; however, if the Panei deems that i transfer 1s appropriate, the D.C. plaintiff favors centraiization . in the District of the District of Columbia. The New Jersey : plaintiff opposes transfer. 9 On the basis of the papers fiied and the hearing held, thea Panel finds that these actions involve common questions of fact = and that centralization under 28 U.S.C. §1407 wili best serve the ; convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the Just and | efficient conduct of the 1itigation. Both actions arise from the i alieged failure of the braking systems in certain automobilies, commonly referred to as X-body cars, manufactured by General : Motors in 1980. Centraiization under Section 1407 is thus i necessary in order to eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent | inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve the resources of the | parties, thelr counsel, and the judiclary. We are persuaded that the District of the District of Columbia is the preferable transferee forum. We note that 1) a reiated government action 1s currently pending in the District of the District of Columbia before the Honorable Thomas P. Jackson; and 2) an enornous volume of the most reievant documents are already located there as a result of their production in this government action. Centrailzation in the District of the District of Columbia would thus facilitate the pretrial phase of the two private actions in this litigation. . C ¥ Judges Fred Daugherty, S. Hugh Dillin and Milton Pollack recused themselves and took no part 1n the decislon of this matter.
§ Co i Case MDL No. 613 Document 10 Filed 06/01/15 Page 2 of 3 “_ | -2- IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407, } the action ilsted on the attached Schedule A and pending in the : District of New Jersey be, and the same hereby 1s, transferred to the District of the District of Columbia and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Thomas P. Jackson for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the action pending in that district and listed on Scheduie A. - FOR THE PANEL: Andrew A. Caffrey Chairman
Co. Case MDL No. 613 Document 10 Filed 06/01/15 Page 3 of 3 4 ® SCHEDULE A MDL-61i3 == In re General Motors 1980 X-Body Car Braking Systems Warranty Litigation District of New Jersey Joseph D. Ferraro v. General Motors Corporation, C.A. No. 53-359 District of the District of Coiumbia Joseph A. Alberti, et al. v. General Motors Corporation,C.A. No. -0
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.