— A 2015 Chevrolet Silverado lawsuit claims the truck spontaneously caught fire while driving and General Motors should be held accountable.
The Chevrolet Silverado fire lawsuit was originally filed in the Warren County Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas but later removed to the Western District of Pennsylvania.
According to Chevy Silverado owner Gregory McKinney, General Motors was reckless and responsible for the truck fire.
The negligence and products liability lawsuit alleges GM should pay punitive damages because of the risk placed on the plaintiff, including "significant harm or death."
In this case, "punitive damages" would be used to punish General Motors because the company "was deemed to have conducted themselves in a manner markedly beyond mere negligence."
"Punitive damages are an extreme remedy and will not be awarded for conduct arising from mere inadvertence, mistake or an error in judgment. The state of mind of the defendant is vital. The act, or failure to act, must be intentional, reckless or malicious.” — Judge Susan Paradise Baxter
According to the lawsuit:
"Defendant GM, acting to serve its own financial interests, consciously disregarded the substantial and known risk that its conduct, through the design, manufacture, sale and use of the foregoing defective product might significantly injure the rights of others; Defendant GM consciously chose to pursue this course of conduct despite having knowledge that it created a substantial risk of significant harm or death to persons such as Plaintiff. An award of punitive damages against Defendant is therefore justified and appropriate."
The plaintiff asserts GM knew or should have known of a danger or defect that would cause consumers to sustain injuries, but the automaker purportedly failed to warn customers or fix the alleged problems.
Motion to Dismiss the Chevy Silverado Fire Lawsuit
General Motors filed a motion to dismiss claims of recklessness and a request for punitive damages by arguing the lawsuit contains only "conclusory" allegations.
Judge Baxter agreed and dismissed allegations of recklessness.
According to the judge, recklessness involves more than ordinary negligence. GM would need to act recklessly where its conduct “creates an unreasonable risk of physical harm to another” and the risk created is “substantially greater than that which is necessary to make his conduct negligent.”
Judge Baxter ruled the Chevy Silverado fire lawsuit does not contain "factual allegations identifying the nature of the alleged defect, how the Defendant allegedly became aware of it, or what actions Defendant failed to take in conscious disregard of that risk. These allegations are conclusory and unsupported by facts."
The reckless claims need to be above mere speculation, but the judge found there is no factual basis that would allow her to provide relief to the plaintiff based on speculation.
In addition, the judge dismissed the claim for punitive damages which may be awarded in Pennsylvania, "for conduct that is outrageous, because of the defendant’s evil motive or his reckless indifference to the rights of others.”
According to the judge:
"Because Plaintiffs request for punitive damages is premised on the same conclusory allegations as the recklessness allegations discussed above, and the Complaint contains no factual allegations suggesting that Defendant acted with an evil motive or conscious disregard of a known risk, Plaintiff has not plausibly stated a claim for punitive damages."
The Chevy Silverado fire lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania: Gregory McKinney v. General Motors, LLC.
The plaintiff is represented by Stewart, Murray & Associates Law Group.