Charlottesville Personal Injury Lawyer - GM

New GM Accepts New Product Liability Claims

Greg Webb — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:00:00 GMT

In a bid to win court approval for a quick sale from bankruptcy, General Motors Corp. (GM) has agreed to accept liability for future product defects. Additionally, GM stated that it would change the terms of its proposed asset sale to address the objections raised by twenty suppliers and was working to create a “consensual” agreement regarding the future of a joint-venture plant with Toyota. These statements by GM demonstrate how the auto manufacturer and Obama administration officials have worked to counter some of the more controversial issues raised by the company’s bankruptcy filing. A group of nine state attorney generals, for example, voiced opposition to GM’s reorganization because it would have robbed consumers of protection against product defects under state legislation.

By August, under the GM reorganization plan, a new company would be created to buy the company’s best assets out of bankruptcy. This new company would be 60 percent owned by the federal government, 17.5 percent by the United Auto Workers union and 11.7 percent by the Canadian government and the province of Ontario. The consumers who have lawsuits pending against GM have objected to the reorganization plan since those injury and wrongful-death claims would have to be paid from the sale of GM’s most worthless assets. They further claim the automaker’s insurance would only cover product liability claims of up to $35 million per claim. This amount would not cover the claims of almost any of the lawsuits since many of the cases involved “devastating injuries” from alleged automobile defects.

GM has agreed, however, to continue paying “lemon law” claims so consumers would be entitled to a refund or replacement for defective vehicles. GM has also stated that the reorganized company, which will be nationalized with a $50 billion investment from the United States Treasury, will assume liability for future product defect claims as well.

While it is a good thing that GM will be back in business as (the New GM), it is a tragedy that there are thousands of product liability claims, including those for asbestos-related illnesses, that will effectively be kicked to the curb. All claims that existed before the "reorganization" are likely never going to be paid anything close to acual value. All of those that fall into this latter group probably feel as if the justice system has failed them. I am not sure how I could argue differently at the present time.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

GM Asbestos Claimants Seek Formal Panel in Bankruptcy

Greg Webb — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:37:39 GMT

Asbestos-injury claimants have asked for an official committee in the General Motors bankruptcy case, saying that the plan to sell the corporation might be unconstitutional since they’ve been excluded from the negotiations.

Lawyers for the claimants stated in a filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York that the authority to approve GM’s plan to sell its assets would be limited without the participation of future asbestos claimants. The filing argued that there are due process concerns that limit the court’s ability to enter an order binding the rights of unknown future claimants in a reorganization of which they are unaware and in which they have not been appointed a legal representative.

Creditors are fighting the spinoff of Chrysler LLC’s core business to a new company owned 20 percent by Fiat SpA. Detroit-based GM has said in regulatory filings that its liability for asbestos-related legal claims was $648 million in 2008 and $637 in 2007. The claimants’ filing said that the magnitude of GM’s asbestos liability has been public knowledge and should have been considered by both the auto corporation and the Auto Task Force in their restructuring activities. Spokeswoman for GM Europe Karin Kirchner declined to comment.

The U.S. Trustee appointed an official committee of GM’s unsecured creditors last week, including two people suing GM for asbestos exposure and product liability. The automaker filed for Chapter 11 protection on June 1. Under U.S. bankruptcy law, companies with asbestos-related liabilities can funnel legal claims into a trust, although lawyers’ bills and costs of official committees in bankruptcy cases are paid by the company.

The GM case is In Re General Motors Corp, 09-50026, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

GM Recalls 15,393 Chevrolet Traverse Vehicles

Greg Webb — Thu, 14 May 2009 14:28:41 GMT

According to NHTSA, General Motors has recalled 15,393 Chevrolet Traverse vehicles for model year 2009. The recall has been issued because of a defective parking brake that does not comply with federal safety requirements. The parking brake cable link does not meet a specification, which may lead to a connector fracturing when the parking brake pedal is pushed down. This in turn can lead to the vehicle moving when parked, especially if parked on a hilll or incline. Dealers will replace the cable free of charge. Owners may call Chevrolet at (800) 630-2438 or NHTSA at (888) 327-4236.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

Gulf War Syndrome is Real Says Congressionally Mandated Panel

Greg Webb — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 08:00:00 GMT

Gulf War syndrome is real and afflicts one-fourth of the 700,000 U.S. troops who served in the War, says a panel report issued in November. A congressionally mandated scientific panel released the report concluding that the syndrome exists, which contradicts almost two decades of government denials. “The extensive body of scientific research now available consistently indicates that Gulf War illness is real, that it is a result of neurotoxic exposures during Gulf War deployment, and that few veterans have recovered or substantially improved with time,” according to the report.

The report comes from the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses, chartered by Congress in 1998 but with no appointed members until 2002. The panel is made up of 15 members, including both scientists and veterans. Their report referred to two chemical exposures typically associated with the disorder: pyridostigmine bromide, given to troops to protect against nerve gas, and pesticides, often overused to protect against sand flies and other pests.

Many veterans reported memory loss, concentration problems, persistent headaches, unexplained fatigue, and widespread pain. Many also reported chronic digestive problems, respiratory symptoms, and skin rashes. The government maintained that the symptoms were due to stress or other unknown causes. “Veterans repeatedly find that their complaints are met with cynicism and a ‘blame the victim’ mentality that attributes their health problems to mental illness or non-physical factors,” said Roberta F. White, associate dean of research at the Boston University School of Health and the panel’s scientific director.

Prior reports issued by the Institute of Medicine, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, concluded that there was little evidence to support existence of the syndrome. The newest report claims that those reports and studies were restricted by the VA. The bulk of research and experiments on the effects of the chemicals were done on animals, but the VA ordered the Institute of Medicine to only consider human studies, which skewed the results. The panel called for the VA to allow the Institute of Medicine to redo its reports, taking into account all available research, including that done on animals.

Additionally, critics believe the VA was reluctant to spend funds on research and treatments that a research committee might recommend. The current panel has called for Congress to appropriate $60 million per year for research into finding a cure for the disorder.

Pyridostigmine bromide, a major cause of the disorder, was given to troops in the fear that Iraqis would resort to chemical warfare. Pesticides, another major cause, were sprayed around living and dining areas, as well as on tents and uniforms, the report stated. Another lesser cause was the demolition of Iraqi munitions, which may have exposed almost 100,000 troops to nerve gases stored at the facility.

Also observed in the report are the significantly higher rates of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis than other veterans, and that troops downwind from the munitions demolition had twice the rate of deaths from brain cancer as other veterans.

“Recognition of the full extent of the illnesses suffered by these veterans of the conflict and the obligation owed them is long overdue,” said Marshal of the Royal Air Force Lord David Craig, chief of the British defense staff during the war. “They are victims of the war as much as anyone struck by a bullet or shell.” Panel chair James H. Binns emphasized, “The importance … lies in what is done with it in the future.”

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb