— A Colorado General Motors Vortec engine oil consumption lawsuit has been dismissed over several popular models that allegedly have defective piston rings.
What began as a nationwide GM Vortec engine class action lawsuit ended as a class action for the below vehicles manufactured on or after February 10, 2011, with Generation IV 5.3 Liter V8 Vortec 5300 LC9 Engines and purchased or leased in the State of Colorado.
- 2011-2014 Chevrolet Avalanche
- 2011-2014 Chevrolet Silverado
- 2011-2014 Chevrolet Suburban
- 2011-2014 Chevrolet Tahoe
- 2011-2014 GMC Sierra
- 2011-2014 GMC Yukon
- 2011-2014 GMC Yukon XL
However, excluded is any vehicle that has received free upgraded piston rings under warranty.
The lawsuit says those vehicles have an “inherent . . . excessive oil consumption problem,” allegedly caused by defective piston rings in the LC9 Vortec 5300 engines.
According to the plaintiff, GM concealed the oil consumption problems from consumers since at least 2008.
Plaintiff Roy White owns a 2011 GMC Sierra equipped with a Generation IV LC9 Vortec 5300 that allegedly has defective piston rings which cause excessive oil consumption.
The problem supposedly causes damage to the Vortec engine, but the plaintiff asserts GM denies there is an oil consumption problem.
GM Vortec Engine Lawsuit Dismissed
In its motion to dismiss, GM argues the Vortec claims should be dismissed due to Colorado’s three year statute of limitations, and also because Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney previously excluded the plaintiff's expert root cause opinions.
The plaintiff contends the statute of limitations should be ignored (tolled) because GM fraudulently concealed the alleged oil consumption defect.
"Because there is a genuine fact dispute over whether GM fraudulently concealed the alleged Oil Consumption Defect, the Court declines to grant summary judgment on statute of limitation grounds." — Judge Sweeney
GM didn't get anywhere with that argument, but it did on the next regarding expert opinion.
According to GM, the plaintiff cannot prove the existence of an oil consumption problem or establish the oil consumption caused the alleged damages without expert testimony.
The judge says in Colorado, expert testimony is generally required to prove causation “when proof of causation requires answering technical questions which are beyond the discernment capacity of laypersons.”
In this case, "laypersons" means jury members.
All it took for the judge to dismiss the Vortec lawsuit was ruling without an expert opinion, the jurors would need to answer technical questions beyond the experience of average laypersons.
"In the Court’s view, the issue here is at least as technical as other issues where courts have determined that expert testimony is required." — Judge Sweeney
The GM Vortec oil consumption lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado: Roy White v. General Motors LLC.
The plaintiff is represented by DiCello Levitt Gutzler LLC, and Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, P.C.
