• News
  • SAN DIEGO
  • Law

GM Recall Judge Wants More Information on ‘Park It’ Request

April 5 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Co. was told by a U.S. judge to provide more explanation for why she shouldn’t force it to tell drivers of 2.59 million recalled small cars to “park it” until faulty ignition switches are fixed.

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos, at the end of a hearing yesterday in Corpus Christi, Texas, gave the lawyers for GM until April 9 to submit written arguments. The judge was considering what would be an unprecedented order by a court to instruct GM on how to handle its recall of the faulty cars.

Customers asked for the order because they say it’s the only “fail-safe solution” to defects linked to 13 deaths, which they say make the cars too dangerous to drive before being repaired.

“No court has ever done what the plaintiffs are asking this court to do,” David Balser, a lawyer for GM, said during the hearing. He said the order would also be unnecessary because replacement parts are on their way to dealers and repairs to recalled cars will begin next week.

The request for a park-it order was made by plaintiffs in a proposed class-action lawsuit seeking as much as $10 billion for the lost value of Chevrolet Cobalts and other small-car models recalled this year. The Detroit-based automaker is facing lawsuits by car owners or investors in Michigan and California, among other states, as well as lawsuits involving injuries and deaths as it seeks to address criticism it knew of the defect for at least a decade and failed to correct it.

Act Quickly

Bob Hilliard, a lawyer for plaintiffs, said it was important for the court to act quickly because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has no authority to issue “park it now” alerts to recalled vehicle owners.

Balser said Hilliard was mistaken. NHTSA wouldn’t have approved the automaker’s recall notice if it felt the cars should be grounded, he told the judge.

After the session, Hilliard said he expects Ramos to rule on the emergency request after reviewing GM’s replies, without another hearing. During a mid-hearing conference with attorneys in her chambers yesterday, the judge told lawyers she was willing to “go fast but she needed more time to read it all,” Hilliard said.

‘Emergency Motion’

“We’re here on an emergency motion because this is an ongoing public safety issue,” Hilliard had said in court.

“There’s no mechanism that can protect tomorrow’s victims but this court,” said Hilliard, of Hilliard Munoz Gonzales LLP in Corpus Christi.

He told the judge GM’s estimate that it will take until October to complete repairs on all the affected vehicles is too long.

“Between now and October, accidents will happen and there will be deaths,” Hilliard said. “What we’re asking is unprecedented, but it is allowed, and the court is allowed to do it to save lives.”

The case is Silvas v. General Motors LLC, 14-cv-00089, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Corpus Christi).

To contact the reporters on this story: Laurel Calkins in federal court in Corpus Christi, Texas, at lcalkins@bloomberg.net; Linda Sandler in New York at lsandler@bloomberg.net To contact the editors responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net; Andrew Dunn at adunn8@bloomberg.net Andrew Dunn, Peter Blumberg

Leave Your Comment

Comments are moderated by SDDT, in accordance with the SDDT Comment Policy, and may not appear on this commentary until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.

SDDT Comment Policy: SDDT encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. All comments should be relevant to the topic and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. You are solely responsible for your own comments, the consequences of posting those comments, and the consequences of any reliance by you on the comments of others. By submitting your comment, you hereby give SDDT the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying and other information you provide via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. SDDT Privacy Statement.

User Response
0 UserComments

Leave Your Comment

Comments are moderated by SDDT, in accordance with the SDDT Comment Policy, and may not appear on this commentary until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.

SDDT Comment Policy: SDDT encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. All comments should be relevant to the topic and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. You are solely responsible for your own comments, the consequences of posting those comments, and the consequences of any reliance by you on the comments of others. By submitting your comment, you hereby give SDDT the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying and other information you provide via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. SDDT Privacy Statement.

Subscribe Today!