Suit alleging defective Chevrolet settled

By Nicholas Malfitano | Apr 10, 2018

PHILADELPHIA – A Littlestown woman settled her action concerning an allegedly-defective Chevrolet vehicle and alleged violation of consumer protection laws, one filed against General Motors and which had initially been headed to arbitration.

On July 12, a settlement order from the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas’ Arbitration Center explained the case pitting Donna Jane Hummel against was settled, that it was both to be marked “discontinued” on the prothonotary’s docket and removed from the applicable list and inventory of pending cases. Further, the case would only be able to be restored to the arbitration list by judicial order and motion from the Motion Program Judge.

Nearly one month later, on Aug. 11, plaintiff counsel Robert M. Silverman filed a praecipe to mark the instant action as “settled, discontinued and ended.”

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Hummel first initiated litigation versus General Motors in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Jan. 31, 2017.

“On or about Feb. 20, 2013, plaintiff purchased a new 2013 Chevrolet Cruze, manufactured and warranted by defendant…the contract price of the vehicle including registration charges, document fees, sales tax, finance and bank charges but, excluding all other collateral charges not specified, yet defined under the Lemon Law, totaled more than $19,773.40,” the lawsuit read.

In exchange for the purchase of the vehicle, the plaintiff alleged she was issued an express written warranty for three years/36,000 miles. The plaintiff further alleged a series of ineffective repairs were made over a period of time spanning December 2015 to September 2016, to alleviate leaking coolant, transmission fluid replacement and brown sludge in the coolant tank, among other automotive issues.

Before settlement and for related counts of violating the Pennsylvania Automobile Lemon Law, the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act and the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law through the ineffective repairs, the plaintiff was seeking damages not in excess of $50,000, plus all collateral charges, attorney’s fees, court costs, treble charges, incidental and consequential damages.

The plaintiff was represented by Silverman of Kimmel & Silverman, in Ambler.

The defendant did not respond to the litigation or officially secure counsel prior to settlement.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 170104158

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at

Want to get notified whenever we write about Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas ?

Sign-up Next time we write about Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas

More News

The Record Network