silvermist
09-17-2007, 06:53 PM
I just got an email from the firm that was handling this case and it seems they were denied class status and are now seeking individual cases.
"We are writing to update you on the status of the Dex-Cool litigation. This email addresses the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) multi-state case pending in East St. Louis, Illinois. It does not concern vehicles purchased in Missouri, California, or Texas, which are expressly excluded from the MDL case. Additionally, this email concerns the 3.1L, 3.4L, 3.8L, and 4.3L engine platforms, which are at issue in the MDL case.
As we previously reported, plaintiffs in the MDL asked the Court to certify the following issues for resolution at trial:
1. Whether the intake manifold gaskets in GM’s 3.1L, 3.4L and 3.8L engines (model years 1996- 2003) are incompatible with Dex-Cool engine coolant, causing the gaskets to fail prematurely; and
2. Whether the engine cooling systems in GM’s 4.3L engine (model years 1996-2000) is incompatible with Dex-Cool engine coolant, causing excessive sludge in the engine’s cooling system.
Unfortunately, the Court denied plaintiffs’ request to certify the class. Among other things, the Court found that the differing state laws, including the requirement in some states that consumers seeking relief for breach of warranty prove “reliance” on the warranty at the time of purchase, and the possible difficulty of figuring out the cause of “sludge” on a class-wide basis, warrant against class certification. It is important for you to understand that the Court’s decision denying class certification is not a decision on the merits of plaintiffs’ case. Instead, it is a decision on whether it is procedurally appropriate for the case to proceed as a class action, as requested by plaintiffs.
We are in the process of determining whether to ask the Court to certify individual state classes on behalf of a more limited line of GM vehicles. Because we have yet to decide on an appropriate course of action, if you are considering pursing a “gasket” or “sludge” claim against GM, such as in your local small claims court, you should not delay in doing so, as the passage of time may effect your rights. If you have a vehicle with a 3.1L, 3.4L or 3.8L engine and have experienced a lower intake manifold gasket failure, and would like us to consider pursing a “gasket” class action limited to your state, please let us know and we will expedite the necessary research and let you know whether such an action is feasible under your state’s laws. If you would like us to undertake such research, you may contact us at generalmotorsclassactionUS@girardgibbs.com.
Girard Gibbs llp
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Phone: (415) 981-4800"
"We are writing to update you on the status of the Dex-Cool litigation. This email addresses the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) multi-state case pending in East St. Louis, Illinois. It does not concern vehicles purchased in Missouri, California, or Texas, which are expressly excluded from the MDL case. Additionally, this email concerns the 3.1L, 3.4L, 3.8L, and 4.3L engine platforms, which are at issue in the MDL case.
As we previously reported, plaintiffs in the MDL asked the Court to certify the following issues for resolution at trial:
1. Whether the intake manifold gaskets in GM’s 3.1L, 3.4L and 3.8L engines (model years 1996- 2003) are incompatible with Dex-Cool engine coolant, causing the gaskets to fail prematurely; and
2. Whether the engine cooling systems in GM’s 4.3L engine (model years 1996-2000) is incompatible with Dex-Cool engine coolant, causing excessive sludge in the engine’s cooling system.
Unfortunately, the Court denied plaintiffs’ request to certify the class. Among other things, the Court found that the differing state laws, including the requirement in some states that consumers seeking relief for breach of warranty prove “reliance” on the warranty at the time of purchase, and the possible difficulty of figuring out the cause of “sludge” on a class-wide basis, warrant against class certification. It is important for you to understand that the Court’s decision denying class certification is not a decision on the merits of plaintiffs’ case. Instead, it is a decision on whether it is procedurally appropriate for the case to proceed as a class action, as requested by plaintiffs.
We are in the process of determining whether to ask the Court to certify individual state classes on behalf of a more limited line of GM vehicles. Because we have yet to decide on an appropriate course of action, if you are considering pursing a “gasket” or “sludge” claim against GM, such as in your local small claims court, you should not delay in doing so, as the passage of time may effect your rights. If you have a vehicle with a 3.1L, 3.4L or 3.8L engine and have experienced a lower intake manifold gasket failure, and would like us to consider pursing a “gasket” class action limited to your state, please let us know and we will expedite the necessary research and let you know whether such an action is feasible under your state’s laws. If you would like us to undertake such research, you may contact us at generalmotorsclassactionUS@girardgibbs.com.
Girard Gibbs llp
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Phone: (415) 981-4800"