Overview
Yesterday, Judge Furman issued a written opinion following up on his earlier denial of a motion to replace the lead plaintiffs' counsel for the ongoing GM ignition switch litigation. Judge Furman lauded the plaintiffs' steering committee for coordinating the massive litigation effort - including over three hundred depositions and almost fifty motions in limine - in just a year and a half. Judge Furman reiterated that the motion was untimely, and that the movants (other plaintiffs' counsel with concerns about the direction of the MDL's leadership) had not met the high burden for unseating lead counsel.
Finally, Judge Furman urged all counsel to get back to the task at hand:
Multi-district litigation of this sort is a complex affair. With so much at stake - in terms of money, ego, and otherwise - it is hardly surprising that conflicts would erupt among counsel, even counsel who are on the same "side" and share a common adversary . . . . The Court also hopes that plaintiffs' counsel will stop litigating their grievances with one another and return to focusing on their common adversary, New GM, and on obtaining relief for their respective clients. That is, the Court hopes that counsel - and their clients - can return to focusing on what is truly at stake in this litigation: determining whether and to what extent the plaintiffs in these proceedings are entitled to relief for injuries caused by the acknowledged ignition switch defect in millions of General Motors cars.Our full coverage of the litigation is here.