In re Volkswagen and Audi Warranty Extention Lit., 1790.

Decision Date29 August 2006
Docket NumberNo. 1790.,1790.
Citation452 F.Supp.2d 1354
PartiesIn Re VOLKSWAGEN AND AUDI WARRANTY EXTENSION LITIGATION Carol Carter v. Volkswagen Of America, Inc. C.D. California, C.A. No. 2:06-2397 Eric Becker v. Volkswagen Of America, Inc., M.D. Florida, C.A. No. 6:06-364 Mildred Kasten v. Volkswagen Of America, Inc., S.D. Illinois, C.A. No. 3:06-285 William Cohen v. Volkswagen Of America, Inc., E.D. Pennsylvania, C.A. No. 2:06-1310
CourtJudicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

This litigation currently consists of one action pending in each of the following districts: the Central District of California, the Middle District of Florida, the Southern District of Illinois, and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.1 The parties jointly move the Panel, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for an order centralizing this litigation in either the Southern District of Illinois or the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs in all actions support transfer to the former district, while defendant Volkswagen of America, Inc. (Volkswagen) supports transfer to the latter district.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, the Panel finds that these four actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization under Section 1407 in the District of Massachusetts will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. These actions are putative statewide class actions that share factual questions concerning the propriety of Volkswagen's August 2004 warranty extension/reimbursement program regarding the 1.8 liter turbocharged engines installed on approximately 462,000 Volkswagen and Audi brand vehicles. Plaintiffs bring various state common law claims such as breach of contract and unjust enrichment, in addition to claims under state statutory law concerning consumer fraud or unfair and deceptive trade practices. Centralization under Section 1407 is necessary in order to eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary.

We are of the view that the District of Massachusetts is an appropriate transferee forum for this docket. By centralizing this litigation before Judge Joseph...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Volkswagen Grp. of Am., Inc. v. Peter J. McNulty Law Firm
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • 27 Julio 2012
    ...courts, alleging, among other claims, consumer fraud and unfair and deceptive trade practices. In Re Volkswagen & Audi Warranty Extension Litig., 452 F.Supp.2d 1354, 1355–56 (J.P.M.L.2006). On August 29, 2006, these suits were consolidated by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation a......
  • In re Volkswagen & Audi Warranty Extension Litig.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 10 Febrero 2015
    ...to be consolidated and transferred to the District of Massachusetts, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. In re Volkswagen & Audi Warranty Extension Litig., 452 F.Supp.2d 1354, 1355 (J.P.M.L.2006). The case was assigned to Judge Tauro, id. at 1356, who ably managed the litigation and approved its ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT