In re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation
Filing
428
FINAL ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ECONOMIC LOSS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, CONFIRMING CERTIFICATION OF THE ECONOMIC LOSS SETTLEMENT CLASS, AND DISMISSING ALL ACTIONS WITH PREJUDICE: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED: Jurisdiction. The Court has personal jurisdiction over all Plaintiffs, the Class and all Class Members, New GM, the GUC Trust, and AAT, as well as subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted in the Fifth Amended Consolidated Complaint filed in In re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, Case No. 14-MD-2543 (JMF) on September 8, 2017 ("5ACC") and the Actions. Venue in the Southern District of New York is proper. As further set forth in this Order. Final Approval of Class Settlement. In accordance with its Final Approval Order, the Court hereby grants final approval to the Settlement Agreement as fair, reasonable, and adequate pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e). The Settlement Agreement provides ample benefits to the Class and avoids protracted litigation, among numerous other advantages. The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement, with respect to Class Members who are minors, lack capacity, or are incompetent, is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court authorizes the Parties to implement the terms of the Settlement Agreement and enjoins the Parties from failing to implement the terms. Overruling of Objections. The Class Member objection filed by Mr. Richard H. Warren (ECF No. 8122) is overruled. The objection filed by Ms. Kisha M. Davis, as personal representative of the estate of her mother, Class Member Mary L. Davis (ECF No. 8216), is also overruled. Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. As further set forth in this Order. Common Fund. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement Implementation Expenses shall be paid from the Common Fund, which was established as a Qualified Settlement Fund under 468B(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code and Treasury Regulation 1.468B-1 pursuant to this Court's Preliminary Approval Order, by the court-approved Qualified Settlement Fund Administrator and Trustee, Flora Bian of JND; however, all such Settlement Implementation Expenses shall be paid from the Common Fund only upon either (i) written approval by Plaintiffs' Class Counsel, New GM, and the GUC Trust or (ii) leave of Court. The Court finds that, pursuant to Paragraph 88.a of the Settlement Agreement, following entry of the GUC Trust Approval Order, the Withdrawal Order, and the Preliminary Approval Order, New GM and the GUC Trust deposited, respectively, $8,800,000.00 and $2,000,000.00 into the Common Fund. As further set forth in this Order. Entry of Final Judgment. The Clerk of the Court is expressly directed to immediately enter this Final Order and Final Judgment in the Actions listed in Appendix C. The Clerk is further directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 8240 and 14-MC-2543, ECF No. 409 and to close Elliott, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-8382; Bledsoe, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-7631; and Sesay, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-6018. As further set forth in this Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/18/2020) (ks)
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 1 of 27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
IN RE:
GENERAL MOTORS LLC
IGNITION SWITCH LITIGATION
This Document Relates To All Economic Loss Actions
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 14-MD-2543 (JMF)
No. 14-MC-2543 (JMF)
Hon. Jesse M. Furman
FINAL ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF
THE ECONOMIC LOSS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, CONFIRMING
CERTIFICATION OF THE ECONOMIC LOSS SETTLEMENT CLASS, AND
DISMISSING ALL ACTIONS WITH PREJUDICE
WHEREAS, Economic Loss Plaintiffs (“Plaintiffs”), General Motors LLC (“New GM”),
the Motors Liquidation Company GUC Trust (the “GUC Trust”), and the Motors Liquidation
Company Avoidance Action Trust (the “AAT”) (collectively, the “Parties”) have entered into a
Settlement Agreement, as Amended on May 1, 2020, including all Exhibits thereto (collectively
the “Settlement Agreement” (ECF No. 7888-1)), subject to preliminary and final approval by this
Court;1
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions of a proposed
settlement and dismissal with prejudice of (a) all economic loss claims, whether asserted as class,
mass, or individual actions, however denominated, that are consolidated for pretrial proceedings
in In re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, Case No. 14-MD-2543 (JMF) (“MDL
2543”), including those listed in Exhibit 1 to the Settlement Agreement (attached for ease of
1
Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined shall have the meaning assigned to such terms
in the Settlement Agreement. Unless otherwise noted, all docket references are to 14-MD-2543.
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 2 of 27
reference as Appendix C) and all economic loss claims relating to the Recalls2 filed in the past,
present, or future in any federal or state court, and (b) all economic loss claims, whether asserted
as class, mass, or individual claims, including all Late Claims Motions and all Proposed Proofs of
Claims involving alleged economic loss, however denominated, filed, or asserted in the
Bankruptcy Case3 ((a) and (b) collectively, the “Actions” as defined in the Settlement Agreement);
WHEREAS, by Order dated April 27, 2020 (the “Preliminary Approval Order,” ECF No.
7877), this Court: (i) preliminarily approved the Settlement; (ii) ordered that notice of the proposed
Settlement be provided to the Class; (iii) provided Class Members with the opportunity to object
2
“Recalls” is defined in the Settlement Agreement as the following seven motor vehicle recalls
conducted by New GM in 2014 as described by National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration (“NHTSA”) recall number: NHTSA Recall No. 14v047 (Delta Ignition Switch),
NHTSA Recall No. 14v355 (Impala Key Rotation), NHTSA Recall No. 14v394 (Cadillac CTS/SRX
Key Rotation), NHTSA Recall No. 14v400 (Malibu Key Rotation), NHTSA Recall No. 14v346 (Kneeto-Key Camaro), NHTSA Recall No. 14v118 (Side Airbag), and NHTSA Recall No. 14v153 (Power
Steering). NHTSA Recall No. 14v047 encompassed (1) 2005-2007 Chevrolet Cobalt; 2006-2007
Chevrolet HHR; 2007 Pontiac G5; 2007 Saturn Sky; 2003 Saturn Ion; and 2006-2007 Pontiac Solstice;
and (2) 2008-2010 Chevrolet Cobalt; 2008-2011 Chevrolet HHR; 2008-2010 Pontiac G5; 2008-2010
Saturn Sky; and 2008-2010 Pontiac Solstice. NHTSA Recall No. 14v355 encompassed the 2005-2009
Buick Lacrosse; 2006-2014 Chevrolet Impala; 2000-2005 Cadillac Deville; 2006-2011 Cadillac DTS;
2006-2011 Buick Lucerne; and 2006-2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo. NHTSA Recall No. 14v394
encompassed certain 2003-2014 Cadillac CTS (as identified by VIN); and certain 2004-2006 Cadillac
SRX (as identified by VIN). NHTSA Recall No. 14v400 encompassed the 2000-2005 Chevrolet
Impala; 1997-2003 Chevrolet Malibu; 2000-2005 Chevrolet Monte Carlo; 1999-2004 Oldsmobile
Alero; 1998-2002 Oldsmobile Intrigue; 1999-2005 Pontiac Grand Am; and 2004-2008 Pontiac Grand
Prix. NHTSA Recall No. 14v346 encompassed 2010-2014 Chevrolet Camaros. NHTSA Recall No.
14v118 encompassed some 2008-2009 (as identified by VIN) and all 2010-2013 Buick Enclave; some
2009 (as identified by VIN) and all 2010-2013 Chevrolet Traverse; some 2008-2009 (as identified by
VIN) and all 2010-2013 GMC Acadia; and 2008-2010 Saturn Outlook. NHTSA Recall 14v153
encompassed some 2005-2010 Chevrolet Cobalt, some 2009-2010 Chevrolet HHR, some 2007-2010
Pontiac G5, 2004-2007 Saturn Ion, 2004-2005 Chevrolet Malibu; 2004-2005 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx
and some 2006 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx (as identified by VIN); some 2005-2006 and 2008-2009
Pontiac G6 (as identified by VIN); and some 2008-2009 Saturn Aura (as identified by VIN).
3
“Bankruptcy Case” is defined in the Settlement Agreement as the chapter 11 case pending in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York captioned In re Motors Liquidation
Co., et al., f/k/a General Motors Corp., et al., Case No. 09-50026 (MG).
-2-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 3 of 27
to the proposed Settlement; (iv) provided Class Members with the opportunity to exclude
themselves from the Class; and (v) scheduled a hearing regarding final approval of the Settlement;
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement was amended on May 1, 2020 to allow the Motors
Liquidation Company Avoidance Action Trust (“AAT”) to become a party to the Settlement
Agreement and the Court entered an Order on May 4, 2020 supplementing the Preliminary
Approval Order to allow for AAT’s entry into the Settlement Agreement and authorizing the
Parties to take, without further Court approval, all necessary and appropriate steps to implement
the Settlement Agreement, including the Class Notice program utilizing amended Class Notice
exhibits to address including AAT (“Order Supplementing Order Granting Preliminary Approval,”
ECF No. 7892);
WHEREAS, due and adequate notice has been given to the Class via the Class Notice
program authorized and approved by the Court;
WHEREAS, the Court conducted a hearing on December 18, 2020 (the “Fairness
Hearing”) to consider, among other things, (i) whether the terms and conditions of the Settlement
are fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement Class, and should therefore be approved; (ii)
whether the proposed Class and Subclasses should be finally certified for settlement purposes only;
and (iii) whether a final judgment should be entered dismissing the Actions with prejudice; and
WHEREAS, the Court having reviewed and considered the Settlement Agreement, all
papers filed and proceedings held herein in connection with the Settlement, all oral and written
comments received regarding the Settlement, and the record in the Actions, and good cause
appearing therefor; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:
-3-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 4 of 27
1.
Jurisdiction. The Court has personal jurisdiction over all Plaintiffs, the Class and
all Class Members, New GM, the GUC Trust, and AAT, as well as subject matter jurisdiction over
the claims asserted in the Fifth Amended Consolidated Complaint filed in In re: General Motors
LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, Case No. 14-MD-2543 (JMF) on September 8, 2017 (“5ACC”)
and the Actions. Venue in the Southern District of New York is proper.
2.
Incorporation of Settlement Documents. The Court expressly incorporates in
this Final Order and Final Judgment and makes a part hereof (a) the Settlement Agreement (ECF
No. 7888-1) and (b) the Court’s oral ruling, on the record, during the Fairness Hearing held on
December 18, 2020. The Court does this for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of
Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 380-82 (1994), concerning
the obligation of a Court entering a settlement agreement to speak clearly when it wishes to retain
jurisdiction.
3.
Final Approval of Class Settlement. In accordance with its Final Approval Order,
the Court hereby grants final approval to the Settlement Agreement as fair, reasonable, and
adequate pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e). The Settlement Agreement provides
ample benefits to the Class and avoids protracted litigation, among numerous other advantages.
The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement, with respect to Class Members who are minors,
lack capacity, or are incompetent, is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court authorizes the
Parties to implement the terms of the Settlement Agreement and enjoins the Parties from failing to
implement the terms.
4.
Overruling of Objections. The Class Member objection filed by Mr. Richard H.
Warren (ECF No. 8122) is overruled. The objection filed by Ms. Kisha M. Davis, as personal
-4-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 5 of 27
representative of the estate of her mother, Class Member Mary L. Davis (ECF No. 8216), is also
overruled.4
5.
Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only.
a.
Pursuant to Rules 23(a)(1)-(4) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the Court certifies the Class as defined in the Settlement Agreement (attached as
Appendix A), for purposes of the Settlement only.
b.
The Court finds, for settlement purposes only, that the Class, including all
Subclasses, meets the requirements for class certification under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
23(a) and 23(b)(3) — namely (a) the Class Members are sufficiently numerous such that joinder
is impracticable; (b) there are common questions of law and fact; (c) the Plaintiffs’ claims are
typical of those of the Class Members; (d) the Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel have
adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent, the interests of the Class
Members, and the Subclasses are adequately represented by proposed Subclass Counsel, which
includes the attorneys who served as Allocation Counsel; and (e) questions of law and fact
common to the Class predominate over the questions affecting only individual Class Members,
and certification of the Class is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient
adjudication of this controversy.
4
The Court has also reviewed certain letters sent to JND by Class Members or their relatives that JND
provided to the Court. See JND Declaration ¶ 37. These are not objections, because, inter alia, they
were not filed with the Court. Even if they had been proper objections, the Court would have overruled
them as without merit. Additionally, for the reasons discussed in an opinion and order to be issued
separately today, the Court finds that non-Class Member Goodwin Proctor lacks standing to object, and
its “limited objection” is also overruled on the merits. See ECF 8207 ¶ 10.
-5-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 6 of 27
c.
The Class excludes under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) and
23(c)(3)(B) those Persons who signed and filed timely and proper exclusion requests (opt-outs)
pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order
on or before the October 19, 2020 deadline, and who did not file a written notice with the Court
revoking their exclusion at any time prior to entry of this Order. The Court finds that of the 164
Persons seeking to opt-out for 195 total Subject Vehicles, the requests by 25 Persons covering 32
Subject Vehicles are invalid and are hereby rejected; the requests of 62 Persons for 68 Subject
Vehicles conform to the requirements of the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order and the
Settlement Agreement and are hereby accepted as valid; and the requests of 84 Persons for 95
Subject Vehicles while deficient due to technicalities nonetheless will be accepted by the Court as
valid.5 Accordingly, the Court rules that all Persons who fall within the class definition are Class
Members except those 146 Persons named on the Opt-Out List (attached as Appendix B).
6.
Appointments of Class and Subclass Representatives. The Court confirms the
appointment of the Class and Subclass Representatives listed in Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the
Preliminary Approval Order.
7.
Appointments of Class Counsel and Allocation Counsel.
a.
The Court confirms the appointment, for settlement purposes only, of Steve
W. Berman, of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, and Elizabeth J. Cabraser of Lieff Cabraser
Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, as Class Counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3).
5
As of November 9, 2020, there were four additional Persons (associated with five distinct VINs)
seeking to opt-out who were missing documentation to represent the deceased class member. These
four Persons were given until the Final Hearing by JND to provide documentation. Only one Person
provided documentation to JND by the Final Hearing. As such, the remaining three Persons who did
not provide documentation to JND by the Final Hearing are invalid opt-outs.
-6-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 7 of 27
Class Counsel are authorized to act on behalf of the Class with respect to all acts required by,
which may be given pursuant to, or which are reasonably necessary to perform the Settlement
Agreement.
b.
The Court confirms the appointment, for settlement allocation purposes
only, of (i) Marc Seltzer of Susman Godfrey as Subclass 1 Counsel; (ii) Joe Rice and Kevin Dean
of Motley Rice as Subclass 2 Counsel; (iii) Peter Prieto and Matthew Weinshall of Podhurst
Orseck, P.A. as Subclass 3 Counsel; (iv) David Boies and Steven Davis of Boies Schiller Flexner
LLP as Subclass 4 Counsel; and (v) Adam Levitt and John Tangren of DiCello Levitt Gutzler as
Subclass 5 Counsel (collectively, “Subclass Counsel”). Subclass Counsel are authorized to act on
behalf of the Subclasses with respect to all acts required by, which may be given pursuant to, or
which are reasonably necessary to perform, the Settlement Agreement.
8.
Class Action Settlement Administrator. The Court confirms the appointment of
Jennifer Keough of JND Legal Administration (“JND”) as Class Action Settlement Administrator
and directs Ms. Keough to carry out all duties and responsibilities of the Class Action Settlement
Administrator as specified in the Settlement Agreement and herein.
9.
Common Fund.
Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement
Implementation Expenses shall be paid from the Common Fund, which was established as a
Qualified Settlement Fund under § 468B(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code and Treasury
Regulation § 1.468B-1 pursuant to this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order, by the court-approved
Qualified Settlement Fund Administrator and Trustee, Flora Bian of JND; however, all such
Settlement Implementation Expenses shall be paid from the Common Fund only upon either (i)
-7-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 8 of 27
written approval by Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, New GM, and the GUC Trust6 or (ii) leave of Court.
The Court finds that, pursuant to Paragraph 88.a of the Settlement Agreement, following entry of
the GUC Trust Approval Order, the Withdrawal Order, and the Preliminary Approval Order, New
GM and the GUC Trust deposited, respectively, $8,800,000.00 and $2,000,000.00 into the
Common Fund.
10.
Allocation of Net Common Fund. The Court finds that the Settlement Claim
Review Protocol and the Allocation Decision are a fair and reasonable method to allocate the Net
Common Fund, and the Parties, the Class Action Settlement Fund Administrator, and the Qualified
Settlement Fund Administrator are directed to administer the Settlement Claim Review Protocol
and Allocation Decision in accordance with their terms.
11.
Settlement and CAFA Notice. The Court finds that the Class Notice and Class
Notice Plan satisfied and continue to satisfy the applicable requirements of Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 23(c)(2)(b) and 23(e), and fully comply with all laws, including the Class Action
Fairness Act (28 U.S.C. § 1711 et seq.), and the Due Process Clause of the United States
Constitution (U.S. Const., amend. V), constituting the best notice that is practicable under the
circumstances of this litigation.
12.
Class Members’ Release and Permanent Injunction. The Court finds that the
Class Members’ Release contained in Paragraphs 121-134 of the Settlement Agreement is valid
and enforceable. The Class Members’ Release is effective automatically as of the Final Effective
6
All Settlement Implementation Expenses incurred prior to the Final Effective Date must be agreed to
in writing by all of Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, New GM, and the GUC Trust. All Settlement
Implementation Expenses incurred on or after the Final Effective Date must be agreed to in writing by
Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel and New GM.
-8-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 9 of 27
Date.7 Pursuant to Paragraphs 121-134 of the Settlement Agreement, the Court permanently bars
and enjoins each Class Member from commencing, filing, initiating, asserting, instituting,
maintaining, consenting to, and/or prosecuting any judicial, arbitral, or regulatory action against
the Released Parties with respect to any and all claims, demands, suits, arbitrations, mediations,
petitions, liabilities, causes of actions, rights, and damages of any kind and/or type included in the
Class Members’ Release.
13.
GUC Trust’s, New GM’s, and the AAT’s Release of Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel,
Allocation Counsel, and Designated Counsel. The Court finds that GUC Trust’s, New GM’s,
and the AAT’s Release of Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, Allocation Counsel, and Designated Counsel
contained in Paragraph 135 of the Settlement Agreement is valid and enforceable. GUC Trust’s,
New GM’s, and the AAT’s Release of Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, Allocation Counsel, and
Designated Counsel Release is effective automatically upon the Final Effective Date. Pursuant to
Paragraph 135 of the Settlement Agreement, the Court enjoins the GUC Trust, New GM, and the
7
The “Final Effective Date” is defined in the Settlement Agreement as “the latest date on which the Final
Order and Final Judgment approving this Agreement becomes final. For purposes of this Agreement:
a. if no appeal has been taken from the Final Order and/or Final Judgment in the MDL Court, then
‘Final Effective Date’ means the date on which the time to appeal therefrom has expired; or
b. if any appeal has been taken from the Final Order and/or Final Judgment in the MDL Court, then
‘Final Effective Date’ means the date on which all appeals therefrom, including petitions for
rehearing or re-argument, petitions for rehearing en banc and petitions for certiorari or any other
form of review, have been finally disposed of in a manner that affirms the Final Order or Final
Judgment in all respects; or
c. if Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, New GM, and the GUC Trust all agree in writing, then the ‘Final
Effective Date’ can occur on any other agreed date, provided, however, that, pursuant to the
direction of the MDL Court, the MDL Court must issue an Order approving any such date agreed
upon by the parties.”
-9-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 10 of 27
AAT from taking any action that violates the Release of Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, Allocation
Counsel, and Designated Counsel.
14.
Releases between the GUC Trust, the AAT, and New GM. The Court finds that
the Releases between the GUC Trust, the AAT, and New GM contained in Paragraphs 136-148 of
the Settlement Agreement are valid and enforceable and were the product of intense and detailed
negotiations between the Parties in light of prior experience by the Parties in this litigation. The
Releases between the GUC Trust, the AAT, and New GM were effective as of the Excess
Distribution Date per the Settlement Agreement.
Pursuant to Paragraphs 136-148 of the
Settlement Agreement, the Court enjoins GUC Trust, the AAT, and New GM from taking any
action that violates the terms of the Releases between the GUC Trust, the AAT, and New GM.
15.
Barred Claims. The Court finds that the bar against claims contained in Paragraph
173 of the Settlement Agreement is valid and enforceable. Pursuant to Paragraph 173, any party
in interest in the Bankruptcy Case, any party in interest in MDL 2543, and any other Person is
barred and enjoined from asserting or attempting to assert claims against or impose liability on any
of the GUC Trust Released Parties, the New GM Released Parties and/or the AAT Released Parties
for any matter arising out of, in connection with, or related to the Settlement Agreement, the
Actions, and/or the Proposed Proofs of Claims (“Barred Claims”).
16.
No Admissions. Neither this Final Order and Final Judgment, nor the Settlement
Agreement (nor any other document referred to herein, nor any action taken to carry out this Final
Order and Final Judgment), is, may be construed as, or may be used as, an admission, adjudication,
or evidence of any violation of any statute or law or of any liability or wrongdoing by the Released
Parties or of the truth of any of the claims or allegations alleged in the 5ACC, the Actions, the Late
-10-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 11 of 27
Claims Motions, or the Proposed Proofs of Claim, or the incurrence of any damage, loss, or injury
by any Person.
17.
Dismissal of Claims. Subject to paragraph 12, supra, in consideration of the
benefits provided under this Agreement, all released claims as set forth in the Class Members’
Release by or on behalf of the Class, Plaintiffs, or any and all Class Members against any and all
Released Parties, are dismissed with prejudice, including the 5ACC and the Actions listed in
Appendix C, subject to Paragraphs 151 and 152 of the Settlement Agreement. See supra ¶ 15.
Subject to paragraph 12, supra, the Court dismisses the 5ACC and the Actions with prejudice
without further costs, including claims for interest, penalties, costs, and attorneys’ fees (except as
otherwise provided in the Settlement Agreement). As discussed on the record during the Fairness
Hearing, no later than January 7, 2021, New GM and Lead Counsel shall submit a proposed Order
or competing Orders and letter briefs establishing a process for Plaintiffs in Actions listed in
Appendix C who allege claims not subject to release under the Settlement Agreement and this
Judgment to file amended complaints limited to such claims and to adjudicate any related disputes.
The proper terms of the dismissals include the retention of jurisdiction contained in paragraph 18
infra, which is included for purposes of compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision in
Kokkonen, 511 U.S. 375. Subject to paragraph 12, supra, the Court orders all Class Members with
released claims pending in any federal or state court, forum, or tribunal other than this Court to
dismiss with prejudice such released claims without further costs, including claims for interest,
penalties, costs, and attorneys’ fees (except as otherwise provided in the Settlement Agreement).
18.
Retention of Jurisdiction. Without affecting the finality of this Final Order and
Final Judgment in any way, this Court retains continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the
-11-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 12 of 27
Parties, the Class Members, the Settlement Agreement, the Actions pending before the MDL
Court, and the Final Order and the Final Judgment (i) to administer and enforce the Settlement
Agreement, (ii) for all matters relating to the Settlement Agreement and the Actions pending before
the MDL Court, and (iii) for any other necessary purpose. The Court does this for the purpose of
satisfying the requirements of Kokkonen, 511 U.S. 375, concerning the obligation of a Court
entering a settlement agreement to speak clearly when it wishes to retain jurisdiction.
In
accordance with the terms of the Qualified Settlement Fund Trust Agreement, the Court also
retains continuing jurisdiction and supervision over (1) the Common Fund, which was established
as a Qualified Settlement Fund, and (2) the Qualified Settlement Fund Administrator and Trustee.
19.
Termination of Settlement. If the Settlement is terminated as provided in Section
XI of the Settlement Agreement or the Final Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement otherwise
fails to occur, this Final Order and Final Judgment shall be vacated, rendered null and void and be
of no further force and effect, except as otherwise provided by the Settlement Agreement, and this
Final Order and Final Judgment shall be without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiffs, the other
Class Members, New GM, the GUC Trust, and the AAT, and the Parties shall revert to their
respective pre-settlement positions in the Actions and in any released claims previously pending
in any other federal or state court, forum, or tribunal that Class Members’ dismissed with prejudice
to the extent provided in the Settlement Agreement.
20.
Compliance with Rule 65(d). The Court has considered and framed this Final
Order and Final Judgment in light of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d). The incorporation of
the terms of the Settlement Agreement into this Final Order and Final Judgment are for the purpose
of approving the Settlement, establishing the benefits of the Settlement available to Class Members
-12-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 13 of 27
set forth in Section II of the Settlement Agreement, and enforcing the releases, waivers, and
covenants not to sue set forth in Section VI of the Settlement Agreement. The benefits of the
Settlement Agreement set forth in Section II of the Settlement Agreement are optional and not
mandatory for Class Members. This Order describes in reasonable detail the acts restrained in
Paragraphs 3, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 above. Hence, this Final Order and Final Judgment fully
complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(1)(C).
21.
Entry of Final Judgment. The Clerk of the Court is expressly directed to
immediately enter this Final Order and Final Judgment in the Actions listed in Appendix C. The
Clerk is further directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 8240 and 14-MC-2543, ECF No. 409
and to close Elliott, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-8382; Bledsoe, et al. v. General
Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-7631; and Sesay, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-6018.
SO ORDERED.
Signed this 18th day of December, 2020.
Honorable Jesse M. Furman
United States District Judge
-13-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 14 of 27
APPENDIX A: CLASS DEFINITION
“Class” means, for settlement purposes only, all Persons who, at any time as of or before
the Recall Announcement Date of the Recall(s) applicable to the Subject Vehicle, own(ed),
purchase(d), and/or lease(d) a Subject Vehicle in any of the fifty States, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and all other United States territories and/or
possessions. The Class is comprised of five Subclasses as follows (the “Subclasses”), and a Class
Member who own(ed), purchase(d), and/or lease(d) more than one Subject Vehicle is included
within different Subclasses listed below and shall be a member of each applicable Subclass:
a. Subclass 1: The Delta Ignition Switch Subclass, comprised of those Class Members
who own(ed), purchase(d), and/or lease(d) a Subject Vehicle subject to NHTSA Recall
No. 14v047. Proposed Subclass 1 Counsel is Marc Seltzer of Susman Godfrey LLP.
b. Subclass 2: The Key Rotation Subclass, comprised of those Class Members who
own(ed), purchase(d), and/or lease(d) a Subject Vehicle subject to NHTSA Recall Nos.
14v355, 14v394, and 14v400. Proposed Subclass 2 Counsel are Joe Rice and Kevin
Dean of Motley Rice LLC.
c. Subclass 3: The Camaro Knee-Key Subclass, comprised of those Class Members who
own(ed), purchase(d), and/or lease(d) a Subject Vehicle subject to NHTSA Recall No.
14v346. Proposed Subclass 3 Counsel are Peter Prieto and Matthew Weinshall of
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
d. Subclass 4: The Electronic Power Steering Subclass, comprised of those Class
Members who own(ed), purchase(d), and/or lease(d) a Subject Vehicle subject to
-14-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 15 of 27
NHTSA Recall No. 14v153. Proposed Subclass 4 Counsel are David Boies and Steven
Davis of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP.
e. Subclass 5: The Side Airbag Subclass, comprised of those Class Members who
own(ed), purchase(d), and/or lease(d) a Subject Vehicle subject to NHTSA Recall No.
14v118. Proposed Subclass 5 Counsel are Adam Levitt and John Tangren of DiCello
Levitt Gutzler.
Excluded from the Class are: (a) the MDL Court and the Bankruptcy Court and each of their
personnel and the judicial officers presiding over the Actions and members of their immediate
family and staffs; (b) authorized GM dealers who executed a dealer agreement with New GM or
Old GM; (c) daily rental fleet purchasers, owners and lessees (including all registrants of a Subject
Vehicle identified as “rental” in the IHS Markit / Polk vehicle registration data provided by New
GM to the Class Action Settlement Administrator); (d) governmental or quasi-governmental
bodies, political subdivisions, and any agency or instrumentality thereof (including all registrants
of a Subject Vehicle designated as “governmental” in the IHS Markit / Polk vehicle registration
data provided by New GM to the Class Action Settlement Administrator); (e) each Person who did
not own, purchase, and/or lease a Subject Vehicle until after the Recall Announcement Date
applicable to that Subject Vehicle; (f) all counsel (and their law firms) representing Plaintiffs in
the Actions, including Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel, Allocation Counsel, Designated Counsel, and
members of their immediate family; (g) all Persons who released claims relating to the Actions
against all of the GUC Trust, the AAT, Old GM and New GM concerning a Subject Vehicle,
including without limitation all Persons who signed a consumer release and received a payment
from the Arizona Attorney General pursuant to the Consent Decree entered on March 8, 2018 by
-15-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 16 of 27
the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in the matter of Arizona v. General Motors LLC, No.
CV 2014-014090 (Maricopa County, Ariz.), all Persons who signed a GM Ignition Compensation
Claims Resolution Facility Release of All Claims and received payment from Claims
Administrator Kenneth Feinberg, and Persons who signed and notarized a release to settle a lawsuit
or unfiled claims with New GM pertaining to a motor vehicle accident involving the Subject
Vehicle in which the release released claims relating to the Actions against all of the GUC Trust,
Old GM and New GM concerning the Subject Vehicle; and (h) all Persons who are Opt-Outs.
-16-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 17 of 27
APPENDIX B: LIST OF OPT OUTS
Valid Opt Outs:
Name
Last 5 Digits of VIN
Araceli Berumen
43470
Barbara M. Allen
20094
Beverly Moore
73219
Bobby Pryor
56897
Brenda Miller
28962
Cesar Augusto Gonzalez-Miranda
43408
Craig May
85951
Dana Watson
79513
Daron Arnold
93408
David Williamson
02836
David Williamson
72481
Diane Piscopo
93084
Diane Tomasic on behalf of Rita
Tomasic
Donna M. Slyster
90894
Elizabeth Hyzy
26315
Elliott Peaks
05492
Eric Sherman
36132
Gabriel Ochoa
15645
Gail L. Keyser
23230
Glen Gargus
97815
Glenn E. Hansen
28590
Glenn E. Hansen
11107
Gregory Fischer
03470
James Arbaugh
17313
James Banks
15097
James E Farrell
51111
61035
-17-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 18 of 27
Jami Harrison
73183
Jeannette Mabee
37905
Jessie Montalvo
45128
Joe Young
69940
Joe Young
08201
John F. Slyster, Jr.
61035
Joseph Falisi
42312
Karen Eder
29012
Kerry A Esparza
54875
Kevin Reber
81435
Kevin Shill
34842
Kimberly Gray
59095
Larry VanHook
84151
Leslie Rose
29787
Linda Diane Persson Grill
08592
Lois Helen Friedrichsen
59488
Lori Jackson
10513
Lory Ochoa
15645
Lynn Sutton
92862
Lynn Sutton
27022
Maria Shill
34842
Mary Inez M Portillo
65660
Mary May
85951
Maureen McCafferty
29124
Melissa Ann Robbins
24552
Melissa Shoemate
95022
Mervin Volker
49526
Nicole Leitner
18415
Omar Espinosa
34079
Pam Santanasto on behalf of Joanne
Ellis
25534
-18-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 19 of 27
Pam Santanasto on behalf of Joanne
Ellis
Patti Frye
02855
Rafael O. Vicente
63502
Richard Guerrero
98525
Russel Miller
28962
Sebastian Montecristo
09373
Steven Sowa
41527
Steven Sowa
14724
Travis Manteuffel
31493
Victor Walker
70527
Vilayvan Phaouthoum
35019
Wanda Volker
70814
40179
-19-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 20 of 27
Deficient Opt Outs:
Name
Last 5 Digits of VIN
Alexander MacKenzie
Andrew Klotzbach
Andrew Klotzbach
Angela Coyle
Anita Cornelius
Ann Trimble-Ray
Anthony Palumbo
Arlene J. McKnight
Bettye Ames
Beverly Mytko
Beverly Thompson
Beverly Thompson
Carol Riley
Carolina Aguero
Charles B. Gosling
Charles J. Bocchicchio
Colleen Phillips
Connie Xanders
Constance Diaz
Constance Shelley
Dale Gray
Darlene Xanders
David J. Bulcavage
Dennis Barnoski
Dixie Lynn LoVerde
Donetta Richardson
Donna F. Kelly
Donna Fisher
64359
75171
17214
46853
08368
76837
74025
53350
77896
31889
37540
83507
85264
63679
32804
50635
25677
60631
76172
63024
87972
60631
27336
95022
20809
17751
89309
35894
Edmund B. Nightingale
Edward Sanders
Elton Lee
Eugene Chapman
Eugene Chapman
Feldkamp Feldkamp
82035
51134
75199
03176
39022
98185
-20-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 21 of 27
Francine Rosman
Gene Hansen
Gladys Harris
Helen M. Seidel
Ina J. Porter Brasher
James B Rhoden
00947
76133
15896
10757
11811
05015
James Bevins
James Bevins
49546
59509
James Kaspszak
James Kaspszak
James Kaspszak
James Kaspszak
Jerilyn Lanagan
John Karhoff
John Karhoff
Joyce A. Berkovitz
Kaci Frame
Kevin Williams
Kristopher Beard
Lana Doolin
Linda Robison
Lisa Tarantino
Lydia Renteria
Margaret Beard
Margaret Sanford
Maria Parmer
Marlene Hobbs
Mary Lou Yindra
Melissa L York
Oliver White
Pat Frye
Patricia Rowland
Patricia Shealy
Philip R. Jones
Rachel D Laird
Raymond Scarazzo
Reanna Barnoski
31665
91302
50247
13203
46699
37977
04494
09453
00067
22028
00310
61034
24480
26966
95418
00310
N/A
89797
07250
06235
N/A
03925
40179
55126
57387
71020
76926
93332
95022
-21-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 22 of 27
Rebecca J. Nightingale
Rhonda Stewart
Richard Johnson
Robert L Wood
Robert Rowland
Rosie Penrod
Ruby Chapman
Ruby Chapman
Sarah Miller
82035
05676
10763
22400
13228
43683
19124
69682
08457
Scott Lanagan
Shane North
Sharon Moeller
Sharon Moeller
Shirley A. Kalleker
Shirley Bock
Steven Feldkamp
Steven Lawrence LoVerde
Steven Lawrence LoVerde
Susana Mendoza
Teresa L. Kunz, Trustee of The
Alice A. Rafidi Revocable Trust of
2016
Theresa Emch
Virginia Whitfill
Vivian Richeson
Walter Hundertmark
67439
07327
95614
32486
83326
04048
98185
21121
00910
48497
57739
48497
73623
52616
08377
-22-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 23 of 27
APPENDIX C: LIST OF ECONOMIC LOSS ACTIONS
Alers v. General Motors LLC, No. 15-CV-0179
Andrews v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5351
Arnold, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5325
Ashbridge v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4781
Ashworth, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4804
Balls, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4691
Bedford Auto v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5356
Belt v. General Motors LLC, et al, No. 14-CV-8883
Bender v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4768
Benton, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4268
Biggs v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5358
Bledsoe, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-7631
Brandt, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4340
Brown, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4715
Burton, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4771
Camlan, Inc., et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4741
Childre, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5332
Coleman, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4731
Corbett, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5754
Cox, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4701
Darby, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4692
-23-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 24 of 27
Deighan, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4858
DeLuco v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-2713
DePalma, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5501
DeSutter, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4685
Detton, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4784
Deushane, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4732
Dinco, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4727
Duarte v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4667
Edwards, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4684
Elliott, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-8382
Elliott, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5323
Emerson, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4650
Espineira v. General Motors LLC, et. al., No. 14-CV-4637
Favro, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4752
Forbes, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4798
Foster, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4775
Fugate v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4714
Gebremariam, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5340
Groman v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-2458
Grumet, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4690
Harris, et al. v. General Motors LLC et al., No. 14-CV-4672
Henry, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4811
-24-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 25 of 27
Heuler, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4345
Higginbotham, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4759
Holliday, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5506
Hurst, et al. v. General Motors Co., No. 14-CV-4707
Ibanez, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5880
Jawad v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4348
Johnson, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5347
Jones v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5850
Jones v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4350
Kandziora v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-8386
Kelley, et al. v. General Motors Co., et al., No. 14-CV-4272
Kluessendorf, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5035
Knetzke, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4641
Kosovec, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-6830
Krause v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-7977
Lannon, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4676
LaReine, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4717
Letterio, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4857
Leval, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4802
Levine v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4661
Lewis, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4720
Maciel, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4339
-25-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 26 of 27
Malaga et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4738
Markle, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4662
Mazzocchi, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-2714
McCarthy v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4758
McConnell, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4270
Mullins v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-8885
Nava, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4754
Nettleton Auto Sales Inc., et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4760
Phaneuf, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-3298
Phillip, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4630
Ponce, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4265
Powell v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4778
Ramirez, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4267
Ratzlaff, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4346
Roach, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4810
Robinson, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4699
Rollins, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-7242
Ross, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4756
Roush, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4704
Ruff, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4764
Rukeyser, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5715
Saclo et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4751
-26-
Case 1:14-mc-02543-JMF Document 428 Filed 12/18/20 Page 27 of 27
Salazar, III, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4859
Salerno, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4799
Santiago, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4632
Satele, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4273
Sauer, et al. v. General Motors, et al., No. 14-CV-5752
Sesay, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-6018
Shollenberger v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4338
Silvas, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4342
Skillman, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-3326
Smith, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5338
Spangler, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4755
Stafford, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4808
Stafford-Chapman, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5345
Stevenson v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-5137
Taylor Deushane, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 14-CV-4732
Turpyn, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-5328
Villa, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4801
Williams, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al. No. 14-CV-7979
Witherspoon, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4702
Woodward, et al. v. General Motors LLC, et al., No. 14-CV-4226
Yagman v. General Motors Company, et al., No. 14-CV-9058
-27-