Cases

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0150p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ JASON COUNTS; DONALD KLEIN; OSCAR ZAMORA; │ JASON SILVE

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS THOMAS L. LUDINGTON, United. States District Judge On June 7, 2016, nine plaintiffs filed a 442-page, complaint alleging deceptive advertising, breach of contract, and fraudulent concealment claims under the. laws of thirty states against Defendant General Motors (“GM”). ECF No. 1. Fundamentally, Plaintiffs allege that GM installed a “defeat

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0170p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DENNIS SPEERLY; JOSEPH SIERCHIO; DARRIN │ DEGRAND; DANIEL DRAIN; WAVERS SMITH; RICHARD

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 24a0257p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ ANDREI FENNER et al., │

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 24a0204p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DENNIS SPEERLY; JOSEPH SIERCHIO; DARRIN DEGRAND; │ DANIEL

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-1563 ___________________________ Nicolas Valadez Rey, Individually, and as Next Friends; Jessica Leanne Quinn, Individually, and as Next Friends Plaintiffs - Appellants v.

21-2640-cv Billie R. Banks v. General Motors, LLC UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2022 (Argued: December 6, 2022 Decided: September 7, 2023) Docket No. 21-2640 BILLIE R. BANKS, Plai

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER [Resolving ECF Nos. 26 and 27] Benita Y. Pearson, United States District Judge Plaintiff Michael J. McNamara, a current employee of Defendant General Motors LLC (“GM”), brought this action against GM alleging claims of disability discrimination, harassment, and retaliation pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code Ch. 4112. These claims are now before the Court upon cr

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-2698 ___________________________ Michael Tucker and Robert Riddell lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants v. General Motors LLC

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 21-2283 ____________ MALL CHEVROLET, INC., Appellant v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC ____________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [17] ■ LAURIE J. MICHELSON, District Judge. This is an Americans with Disabilities Act case. Plaintiff William Anderson II, an automobile assembler, alleges that his employer, Defendant General Motors (“GM”), discriminated against him on the basis of his wrist and neck injuries by imposing unnecessary work restr

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT CERTIFIED MOTORS, LLC, a Florida limited liability company; and JOSEPH ELNAGGAR, Appellants, v. AVENTINE HILL, LLC, a Florida limited liability company; and MANUEL DELGADO, JR., Appellees. No. 2D22-2306

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DAVID M. LAWSON, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Patricia Kienzle alleges in a complaint filed in this Court that from July 2009 to January 2010, defendant General Motors LLC (GM) paid Kienzle less money for doing the same work a

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

*32OPINION AND ORDER JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: The first bellwether trial in this multi-district litigation (“MDL”), familiarity with which is presumed, involves claims brought by Plaintiff Robert Scheuer (“Plaintiff’ or “Scheuer”) against General Motors LLC (“Defendant” or “New GM”) stemming from a May 28, 2014 car accident involv

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS JAMES I. COHN, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 22] (“Motion”), Plaintiffs’ Response [DE 24] and Defendant’s Reply [DE 25]. The Court has reviewed these motion papers, the relevant portions of the case file, and is otherwise advised in the premises. Upon review, the Court will DENY the Motions.</

ORDER JULIAN ABELE COOK, JR., District Judge. The Plaintiff, Bruce Backhaus, filed this action against the Defendant, General Motors LLC (“GM”), alleging that it had violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101, and Michigan’s Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1101 (“PWDCRA”). His amended complaint alleges that GM (1) refu

LINDA V. PARKER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE On January 30, 2018, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against Defendants asserting the following claims: (I) age discrimination in violation of the federal Age Discrimination and Employment Act ("ADEA"); (II) age discrimination in violation of Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act ("ELCRA"); (III) race and ethnic discrimination in violation of

OPINION AND ORDER JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: [Regarding New GM’s Partial Motion To Dismiss the Fourth Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint] INTRODUCTION .. .391 BACKGROUND .. .392 LEGAL STANDARDS .. .394 DISCUSSION .. .395 A. Brand Devaluation Claims... .395 B. Damages for L

*363OPINION AND ORDER JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: The next bellwether trial in this multi-district litigation (“MDL”), familiarity with which is presumed, involves claims brought by Plaintiff Stephanie Cockram against General Motors LLC (also known as “New GM”) stemming from a June 28, 2011 car accident. At the time of the accide