UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION IN RE: FCA US LLC MONOSTABLE ELECTRONIC GEARSHIFT LITIGATION

MDL No. 2744 This Document Relates to: ALL ACTIONS

Case Number 16-md-02744 Honorable David M. Lawson Magistrate Judge David R. Grand

______________________________________ /

CONSOLIDATED MASTER CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

2:16-md-02744-DML-DRG Doc # 31 Filed 12/23/16 Pg 1 of 505 Pg ID 415

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 5 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE .................................................................... 18 III. PARTIES ....................................................................................................... 19

A. Arizona Plaintiffs ................................................................................ 19 B. California Plaintiffs ............................................................................. 21 C. Colorado Plaintiffs .............................................................................. 24 D. Florida Plaintiffs .................................................................................. 25 E. Georgia Plaintiffs ................................................................................ 26 F. Iowa Plaintiffs ..................................................................................... 26 G. Illinois Plaintiffs .................................................................................. 27 H. Louisiana Plaintiffs.............................................................................. 29 I. Maryland Plaintiffs .............................................................................. 30 J. Massachusetts Plaintiffs ...................................................................... 32 K. Michigan Plaintiffs .............................................................................. 35 L. Minnesota Plaintiffs ............................................................................ 36 M. Missouri Plaintiffs ............................................................................... 37 N. Nebraska Plaintiffs .............................................................................. 39 O. Nevada Plaintiffs ................................................................................. 40 P. New Jersey Plaintiffs ........................................................................... 41 Q. New York Plaintiffs............................................................................. 42 R. North Carolina Plaintiffs ..................................................................... 46 S. Ohio Plaintiffs ..................................................................................... 48 T. Oklahoma Plaintiffs ............................................................................. 49 U. Oregon Plaintiffs ................................................................................. 50 V. Pennsylvania Plaintiffs ........................................................................ 51 W. Texas Plaintiffs .................................................................................... 53 X. Utah Plaintiffs ...................................................................................... 59

2:16-md-02744-DML-DRG Doc # 31 Filed 12/23/16 Pg 2 of 505 Pg ID 416

ii

Y. Virginia Plaintiffs ................................................................................ 60 Z. Washington Plaintiffs .......................................................................... 61 AA. Wisconsin Plaintiffs ............................................................................ 62 BB. Wyoming Plaintiffs ............................................................................. 63 CC. Defendant ............................................................................................ 65

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ........................................................................ 66 A. Shift-by-Wire Transmission Systems ................................................. 66 B. The Defective Shifter .......................................................................... 69 C. The Defective Shifter Does Not Adequately Alert Drivers

to the Class Vehicles Gear Position ................................................... 72 D. FCA Touted Safety in Its Marketing and Advertising ........................ 76 E. FCA Knew About the Defective Shifter and Associated

Safety Risks ......................................................................................... 83 1. NHTSA Complaints .................................................................. 84

F. FCA Stopped Installing the Defective Shifter in its Vehicles ............................................................................................... 98

G. NHTSA Confirms a Design Defect in the Defective Shifter .................................................................................................. 99

H. Despite NHTSAs Findings and FCAs Voluntary Recall, FCA Blames Drivers and Fails to Provide a Remedy within a Reasonable Time ................................................................. 103 1. The Class Vehicles Are Recalled ............................................ 104 2. FCA Failed to Provide a Remedy Within a

Reasonable Time ..................................................................... 107 3. FCA Wrongly Blamed Drivers for Rollaway

Incidents While it Delayed its Response ................................ 109 I. FCA Finally Provides a Purported Remedy for Certain

Class Vehicles: One that is Ineffective and Diminishes the Functionality of the Class Vehicles. ............................................ 114 1. FCAs Purported Remedy Is Ineffective ................................ 115 2. FCAs Purported Remedy Has Led to Other

Mechanical Failures in Class Vehicles ................................... 117

2:16-md-02744-DML-DRG Doc # 31 Filed 12/23/16 Pg 3 of 505 Pg ID 417

iii

3. FCAs Purported Remedy Diminishes the Functionality of the Class Vehicles ........................................ 126

4. Plaintiffs and Class Members Were Harmed by the Recall While Defendant Benefited ......................................... 127

J. FCAs Delayed and Inadequate Response to the Defective Shifter Deprived Class Members of the Benefit of their Bargain and Has Led to a Decrease in Value of the Class Vehicles ............................................................................. 129

V. TOLLING OF THE STATUE OF LIMITATIONS AND ESTOPPEL .................................................................................................. 134 A. Discovery Rule Tolling ..................................................................... 134 B. Estoppel ............................................................................................. 135

VI. CLASS ALLEGATIONS ............................................................................ 135 VII. VIOLATIONS ALLEGED .......................................................................... 142

A. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Nationwide Class ......................... 142 B. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Arizona Subclass ......................... 145 C. Claims Brought on Behalf of the California Subclass ...................... 158 D. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Colorado Subclass ....................... 175 E. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Florida Subclass ........................... 186 F. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Georgia Subclass ......................... 198 G. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Illinois Subclass ........................... 214 H. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Iowa Subclass .............................. 227 I. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Louisiana Subclass....................... 240 J. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Maryland Subclass ....................... 246 K. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Massachusetts Subclass ............... 258 L. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Michigan Subclass ....................... 271 M. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Minnesota Subclass ..................... 285 N. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Missouri Subclass ........................ 303 O. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Nebraska Subclass ....................... 316 P. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Nevada Subclass .......................... 328 Q. Claims Brought on Behalf of the New Jersey Subclass .................... 341

2:16-md-02744-DML-DRG Doc # 31 Filed 12/23/16 Pg 4 of 505 Pg ID 418

iv

R. Claims Brought on Behalf of the New York Subclass ...................... 354 S. Claims Brought on Behalf of the North Carolina Subclass .............. 364 T. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Ohio Subclass .............................. 374 U. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Oklahoma Subclass ...................... 387 V. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Oregon Subclass .......................... 400 W. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Pennsylvania Class ...................... 413 X. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Texas Subclass ............................. 426 Y. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Utah Subclass ............................... 439 Z. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Virginia Subclass ......................... 451 AA. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Washington Subclass ................... 464 BB. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Wisconsin Subclass ..................... 476 CC. Claims Brought on Behalf of the Wyoming Subclass ...................... 488

VIII. REQUEST FOR RELIEF ............................................................................ 501 IX.