Taylor v. General Motors LLC

Filing 97

ORDER: New GM and the Hancock Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED to meet-and-confer regarding this dispute no later than August 24, 2020. New GM shall address and/or remedy these issues in any new reply. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/10/2020) (ks)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
IN RE:
GENERAL MOTORS LLC IGNITION SWITCH LITIGATION
14-MD-2543 (JMF)
This Document Relates To:
Dukes v. General Motors LLC, 19-CV-11922
Hemingway v. General Motors LLC, 19-CV-6528
Hancock v. General Motors LLC, 18-CV-1019
Taylor v. General Motors LLC, 17-CV-6155
Tenley v. General Motors LLC, 20-CV-3307
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER

JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:
On July 29, 2020, New GM filed a motion to dismiss, without prejudice, the claims of
several personal injury and wrongful death plaintiffs identified in Exhibit A (the “Affected
Plaintiffs”) who had allegedly failed to submit substantially complete plaintiff fact sheets
(“PFSs”) or document productions as required by Order No. 25, ECF No. 422; Order No. 108,
ECF No. 3115; and Order No. 148, ECF No. 5366. See ECF No. 7809. 1 Earlier today, the Court
issued Order No. 173, which clarifies and/or modifies the deadlines for such motions. See ECF
No. 8094. In light of that Order, and out of an abundance of caution, the Court grants an
extension to the Affected Plaintiffs until August 24, 2020 to file responses either certifying
submission of a completed PFS or document productions or opposing New GM’s motion for
other reasons. And in light of that, the Court will disregard the reply brief submitted by New
GM on August 6, 2020. See ECF No. 8088. New GM shall file any new reply in support of
their motion to dismiss no later than one week after Affected Plaintiffs’ deadline to certify
compliance or oppose the motion.

1

All docket references are to 14-MD-2543 unless otherwise noted.

The Court notes that New GM’s August 6th reply contains at least two problems or
deficiencies, to wit: (1) it fails to include Plaintiff William Tenley on the exhibit, ECF No. 8088,
Ex. A, and fails to indicate whether New GM intends to withdraw the motion to dismiss as to
him; and (2) it fails to address the response filed by the Affected Plaintiffs in Hancock v. General
Motors LLC, 18-CV-1019 (“Hancock Plaintiffs), to New GM’s motion to dismiss, including the
Hancock Plaintiffs’ contention that “Defendant’s counsel received the listed documents by 6:00
pm CST on July 29, 2020” and that “[t]here are no medical records that can be produced” as to
some Plaintiffs. 18-CV-1019, ECF No. 111, at 1-2. New GM and the Hancock Plaintiffs are
hereby ORDERED to meet-and-confer regarding this dispute no later than August 24, 2020.
New GM shall address and/or remedy these issues in any new reply.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 10, 2020
New York, New York

__________________________________
JESSE M. FURMAN
United States District Judge

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A
Name

Cause No.

Dukes, Jennifer
Hemingway, Marcus (OBO
Kenya Robinson)
Hollon, April and Maynard,
Tia (NF L.H.)
Hollon, April and Maynard,
Tia (NF T.H.)
Hollon, April and Maynard,
Tia (NF C.N.)
Hollon, April and Maynard,
Tia (NF R.N.)
Taylor, Matthew Chase

Dukes v. General Motors LLC, 19-CV-11922

Tenley, William

Tenley v. General Motors LLC, 20-CV-3307

Hemingway v. General Motors LLC, 19-CV-6528
Hancock v. General Motors LLC, 18-CV-1019
Hancock v. General Motors LLC, 18-CV-1019
Hancock v. General Motors LLC, 18-CV-1019
Hancock v. General Motors LLC, 18-CV-1019
Taylor v. General Motors LLC, 17-CV-6155