Stephen Yagman v. General Motors Company et al
| Stephen Yagman |
| General Motors Company, Mary Barra and Unknown Named Defendants |
| 1:2014cv09058 |
| November 13, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Jesse M. Furman |
| Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1961 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
354
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: On April 20, 2021 the Court granted pro se Plaintiff Stephen Yagman's motion and issued a formal suggestion to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") that his case be remanded back to the Central District of California, from which it had been transferred to this Court. The Court did so after determining that Mr. Yagman had opted out of the class settlement approved in December 2020 and, thus, had not released his claims. See Yagman v. Gen. Motors Co. (In re Gen. Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litig.), Nos. 14-MD-2543 (JMF) et al., 2021 WL 1566053 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 20, 2021) (ECF No. 8499). New GM now moves for expedited briefing on the question of whether remand is actually appropria te, asserting that it understood MDL Order No. 174 to have narrowly limited the scope of briefing solely to the issue of whether or not Mr. Yagman was a class member.New GM's application is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 8501 and 14-CV-9058, ECF No. 349. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/23/2021) (ama)
|
|
Filing
348
OPINION AND ORDER AND SUGGESTION OF REMAND: re: (341 in 1:14-cv-09058-JMF) MOTION TRANSFER/REMAND BACK TO CENT. DIST. OF CALIF. re: (338) Order filed by Stephen Yagman. For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that Yagman did, in fact, opt ou t of the Class Settlement. It follows that his claims were not, in fact, subject to the release and that his complaint was improperly dismissed. Accordingly, the Court vacates that dismissal and reinstates his First Amended Complaint, ECF No. 24 (e xcept that the class allegations in Paragraphs 68 to 78 are stricken given the Class Settlement approved by the Court). That disposes of New GM's sole argument against Yagman's remand motion. Accordingly, and because there is no good reas on to maintain this action here given the settlement and the fact that the MDL proceedings have all but concluded, Yagman's motion for an order suggesting that the JPML remand his case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California is GRANTED. See Mem'l Hermann Healthcare Sys. v. State St. Bank & Tr. Co. (In re State St. Bank & Tr. Co. Fixed Income Funds Inv. Litig.), Nos. 08-CV-5440 (RJH), 08-CV-5442 (RJH), 2011 WL 1046162, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2011) ( explaining that in determining whether to issue a suggestion of remand to the JPML, courts consider whether "pretrial proceedings have run their course," "whether the case will benefit from further coordinated proceedings as part of th e MDL," and whether "remand will best serve the expeditious disposition of the litigation" (internal quotation marks omitted)). Finally, the Court approves the limited redactions New GM included in its paperspertaining to this motion o n a permanent basis substantially for the reasons stated therein. See Def.'s Opp'n 5 n.2. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-CV-9058, ECF No. 341; to re-open 14-CV-9058; and to send a copy of this Opinion and Order to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/20/2021) (ama)
|
|
Filing
339
MEMO ENDORSED ORDER in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; denying (337) Motion to Remand in case 1:14-cv-09058-JMF. ENDORSEMENT: Application DENIED. The Court's December 23, 2020 endorsement, see 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 8311, stated in no uncertain terms th at Mr. Yagman's Sixth Motion to Remand was denied without prejudice to renewal in accordance with whatever procedures the Court adopted with respect to further proceedings in the MDL --- as to which counsel was given until January 7, 2021, to submit a proposed order. In light of that Order, Mr. Yagman's latest motion -- filed before the Court entered an order regarding the relevant procedures -- is patently improper and denied. Mr. Yagman shall comply instead with the procedures s et forth in Order No. 174 (signed before, but docketed after, his motion was filed). The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this in both 14-MD-2543 and 14-CV-9058 and to terminate 14-CV-9058, ECF No. 337. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/8/21) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-09058-JMF (yv)
|
|
Filing
333
MEMO ENDORSED ORDER in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; denying without prejudice to renewal (328) Motion to Remand in case 1:14-cv-09058-JMF. ENDORSEMENT: Application GRANTED. The parties shall include information responsive to 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 7922 in their submissions no later than January 7, 2021. Further, in light of the below, Mr. Yagman's motion to remand is DENIED without prejudice to renewal subject to the procedures the Court adopts concerning further proceedings in the MDL. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this on 14-MD-2543 and 14-CV-9058 and to terminate 14-CV-9058, ECF No. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/23/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-09058-JMF (yv)
|
|
Filing
330
MEMO ENDORSEMENT with respect to (328) Motion to Remand in case 1:14-cv-09058-JMF. ENDORSEMENT: As discussed on the record during the Fairness Hearing held on December 18, 2020, and memorialized in the Final Order and Final Judgment at 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 8306, New GM and Class Counsel are to confer and, no later than January 7, 2020, propose procedures to adjudicate whether or to what extent claims in any member cases can proceed following the settlement and whether or when they should be re manded to their transferor courts. The Court assumes that Mr. Yagman's request should be denied without prejudice to renewal in accordance with whatever procedures the Court adopts. No later than December 23, 2020, at noon, New GM shall file a l etter indicating whether it agrees or whether it consents to remand of Mr. Yagman's case now that the settlement has been approved. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this in both 14-MD-2543 and 14-CV-9058. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/21/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-09058-JMF (jwh)
|
|
Filing
324
ORDER. Mr. Yagman's sixth motion for remand is DENIED, substantially for the same reasons that the Court denied his prior motions, see ECF No. 259 (denying remand request as premature); ECF No. 263 (same); ECF No. 270 (same); ECF No. 274 (sam e); ECF No. 287 (same); ECF No. 314 (same); see also ECF Nos. 264, 271, 281, 288, and for the additional reasons substantially stated in New GMs opposition. Most importantly, Mr. Yagman remains subject to Order Nos. 29 and 50, which allow a plaint iff to independently pursue economic loss claims only if no class is certified or if the plaintiff opts out of a certified class. See 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 875, at 1-2. Because the Court has neither certified nor refused to certify a class, Mr. Yagm an's motion to remand is and remains premature. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-CV-9058, ECF No. 314. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/20/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-09058-JMF (yv)
|
|
Filing
315
MEMO ENDORSED ORDER, Set Deadlines/Hearing as to (314 in 1:14-cv-09058-JMF) MOTION to Transfer Case back to CDCA,. ENDORSEMENT: Any opposition to Mr. Yagman's motion shall be filed by May 7, 2020; any reply shall be filed by May 14 , 2020. In their submissions, the parties should address whether Mr. Yagman is a putative member of the proposed settlement class and, if so, whether this motion should be denied without prejudice to renewal in the event that he opts out of the cla ss in accordance with the Court's order granting preliminary approval to the settlement and/or after final approval. SO. ORDERED ( Responses due by 5/7/2020, Replies due by 5/14/2020.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/29/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-09058-JMF (yv)
|
|
Filing
300
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: In short, Mr. Yagman's complaint remains dismissed. As provided in Order No. 50, should a class be certified of which he is a member, Mr. Yagman may recover as a member of that class or he may opt out of the class and re-file his complaint at that time. 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 875, at 1-2. Similarly, in the event that the Court denies class certification, Mr. Yagman may re-file his complaint. Id. In short, Mr. Yagman's complaint is dismissed without prejudice to re-filing in accordance with MDL Order Nos. 29 and 50. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/15/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:14-cv-09058-JMF(rro)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
