Ward v. General Motors L.L.C.
Plaintiff: Dennis R. Ward
Defendant: General Motors L.L.C.
Case Number: 1:2014cv08317
Filed: October 17, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Jesse M. Furman
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 5, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 380 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding New GM's Thirty-Fifth and Thirty-Sixth Motions in Limine] re: (4127 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 336 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF) MOTION in Limine No. 36 To Exclude Evidence Relating to the City of Tucson Pavement Conditio n Data, filed by General Motors LLC, (309 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF, 4068 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION in Limine No. 35 to Exclude Evidence Relating to Adequacy of Recall Repairs, the Sufficiency of the Recall Notice, and the Availability of Repair Parts and Loaner Vehicles, filed by General Motors LLC. Although preclusion is a harsh sanction, see, e.g., Design Strategy, 469 F.3d at 297, and a court "must consider less drastic responses" before ordering preclusion, Outl ey v. City of New York, 837 F.2d 587, 591 (2d Cir. 1988), the Court concludes that it is warranted, if not necessary, here. See, e.g., Estate of Jaquez v. Flores, No. 10-CV-2881 (KBF), 2016 WL 1060841, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2016) (precluding ev idence that was first disclosed after the close of discovery and shortly before trial because, among other things, the plaintiffs had been "clearly aware that [the relevant] issues would be hotly contested and central to the case, and merely sought to sandbag the defendants at this late hour," noting that the plaintiffs had "proceeded at their peril when they decided not to furnish the required information to defendants during discovery" and "now must live with tha t tactical choice"); Quiles v. City of N.Y., No. 11-CV-5613 (FM), 2014 WL 1918635, at *5-6 (S.D.N.Y. May 8, 2014) (precluding documents disclosed for the first time shortly before trial where "the records in question relate[d] directly t o [a known] issue," witnesses were available to give testimony to "establish those [same] facts," and the opposing party "would be prejudiced by the...eleventh-hour disclosure"). Accordingly, New GM's Thirty-Sixth Motio n in Limine is granted. For the reasons stated above, New GM's Thirty-Fifth and Thirty-Sixth Motions in Limine are GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket Nos. 4068 and 4127, and 14-CV-8317, Docket Nos. 309 and 336, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/5/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-08317-JMF (ras)
June 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 371 OPINION AND ORDER re: Categorical Deposition Designation Disputes and the Redaction or Admissibility of the Valukas Report and the Statement of Facts -- See Order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/30/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-08317-JMF (ab)
June 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 328 OPINION AND ORDER re: (3868 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Summary Judgment, filed by General Motors LLC, (206 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF, 3882 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment, filed by Dennis R. Ward, (3873 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 198 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF) MOTION in Limine to Exclude Expert Opinions Under Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702, filed by General Motors LLC, (3877 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 202 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF) MOT ION in Limine to Exclude Expert Opinions Under Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702, filed by Dennis R. Ward, (193 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF) MOTION for Summary Judgment, filed by General Motors L.L.C. New GM's Daubert motio n is granted in part and denied in part, while Ward's Daubert motion is denied without prejudice to raising objections to particular testimony at trial. Additionally, New GM's motion for summary judgment is denied to the extent that it se eks dismissal of all claims on causation grounds and Ward's claims sounding in negligence on other grounds, but granted to the extent that it seeks dismissal of Ward's fraud claims. Finally, Ward's motion for partial summary judgmen t is denied. New GM's Daubert motion is granted in part and denied in part, and Ward's Daubert motion is denied in its entirety (albeit without prejudice to his objections to specific testimony at trial). Additionally, New GM's motio n for summary judgment is denied to the extent it seeks dismissal of all Ward's claims on causation grounds and his claims sounding in negligence on other grounds, but is granted to the extent that it seeks dismissal of Ward's fraud claim s that is, his claim of fraudulent concealment and his claim under Arizona's CFA. (It follows that New GM's motion is also denied to the extent it seeks dismissal of Ward's claims for punitive damages, as he may seek punitive damag es in connection with his "Independent Claims" of negligence.) Finally, Ward's motion for partial summary judgment seeking a finding that vehicles containing the 190 switch, including his own, were manufactured defectively is denie d. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket Nos. 3868, 3873, 3877, and 3882; and 14-CV-8317, Docket Nos. 193, 198, 202, and 206, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/20/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-08317-JMF (ras)
June 9, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 306 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding the Parties' Motions in Limine and the Admissibility of Plaintiffs Other Similar Incident Evidence] re: (3941 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 237 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF), MOTION in Limine No. 4 to Exclude Evidence of P ast Tobacco Use, filed by Dennis R. Ward, (3924 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 220 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF) MOTION in Limine No. 33 To Exclude Dennis Ward's August 2014 Ignition Switch Videos, filed by General Motors LLC, (229 in 1:14-cv -08317-JMF, 3933 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION in Limine to Exclude Evidence Regarding Spoliation of Sensing and Diagnostic Module (SDM) Data, filed by Dennis R. Ward, (233 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF, 3937 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION in Limine No. 3 to Permit Plaintiff to Use Demonstration Videos During His Case in Chief, filed by Dennis R. Ward, (223 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF, 3927 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION in Limine No. 1 re Evidence of March 27, 2014 Traffic Citati on, filed by Dennis R. Ward.Ward's First Motion in Limine and New GM's Thirty-Third Motion in Limine are granted, Ward's Third and Fourth Motions in Limine are denied, and the Court reserves judgment on Ward's Second Motion in Limine pending trial. In addition, Ward's application to admit OSI evidence is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, Ward may introduce evidence of fifty-six of the sixty OSIs (Pl.'s OSI Discl., Rows 1-56) for purposes of proving notice only. Ward may not introduce evidence of any OSIs (except the one in his own vehicle (id. at Row 57), which may or may not constitute OSI evidence in the first instance) to prove the existence of a defect or causation. Finally, the three unverified consumer complaints (id., Rows 58-60) will not be admitted for any purpose. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket Nos. 3761, 3924, 3927, 3933, 3937, and 3941 and 14-CV-8317, Docket Nos. 220, 223, 229, 233, and 237, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/9/2017) (ras)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ward v. General Motors L.L.C.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dennis R. Ward
Represented By: James J Bilsborrow
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: General Motors L.L.C.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?