DealershipForum.com - View Single Post - Q&A - Bellavia Gentile & Associates, LLP suit against the Treasury

DealerLaw.com · 12-07-2010, 07:45 PM

All valid questions Noah. I prepared a letter about a month ago outlining the differences between the two types if cases. I will send you a copy. Anyone else interested should e-mail me at LBellavia@DealerLaw.com and I will provide a copy. Suffice it to state that I advise against a class action for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that you are not asserting a claim for your own financial damages, but are part of a group asserting damages in the aggregate with a committee making important decisions for you.
We are only about 4 dealers shy of starting the lawsuit. I expect that we will reach our goal over the next few days. In my post of November 11th above you will see that we were 45 dealers short of our goal. The response has been overwhelming with dozens of dealers joining over the last 3 weeks. This accounts for my silence on this website as I have been busy taking phone calls and replying to e-mails from rejected dealers.
Anyone who is unsure of the soundness of my legal theory that the Government acted without constitutional authority in conditioning the bail-out funds on cutting 25% of Chryslers dealers should read the cover story of today's Wall Street Journal, on the Money and Investments section. Some of the nation's top Constitutional Law Professors conducted a Symposium recently at Stanford University School of Law to discuss the Constitutionality of the President's use of the TARP funds. The conclusion was that it was a constitutional exercise of emergency powers of the President to use the funds to bail out insurance and banking "institutions", but that the authority granted by Congress did not extend to the bail out of the auto industry. Sure the bailout was necessary, but that does not mean that anything goes. As the SIGTARP report found, there was insufficient justification for the dealer cuts. Tomorrow I will post a link to the article.
I am happy to speak with anyone who has questions about my proposed lawsuit. Just give me a call at 516-873-3000. By the way, there were 28 GM dealers who refused to sign the GM Wind-Down Agreement . These dealers are eligible to join my case as they did not release the Government from liability. If you know any of these 28, please pass the info along. Regards to all, Len Bellavia

12-07-2010, 07:45 PM	#14
DealerLaw.com Supporting Sponsor Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 39	All valid questions Noah. I prepared a letter about a month ago outlining the differences between the two types if cases. I will send you a copy. Anyone else interested should e-mail me at LBellavia@DealerLaw.com and I will provide a copy. Suffice it to state that I advise against a class action for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that you are not asserting a claim for your own financial damages, but are part of a group asserting damages in the aggregate with a committee making important decisions for you. We are only about 4 dealers shy of starting the lawsuit. I expect that we will reach our goal over the next few days. In my post of November 11th above you will see that we were 45 dealers short of our goal. The response has been overwhelming with dozens of dealers joining over the last 3 weeks. This accounts for my silence on this website as I have been busy taking phone calls and replying to e-mails from rejected dealers. Anyone who is unsure of the soundness of my legal theory that the Government acted without constitutional authority in conditioning the bail-out funds on cutting 25% of Chryslers dealers should read the cover story of today's Wall Street Journal, on the Money and Investments section. Some of the nation's top Constitutional Law Professors conducted a Symposium recently at Stanford University School of Law to discuss the Constitutionality of the President's use of the TARP funds. The conclusion was that it was a constitutional exercise of emergency powers of the President to use the funds to bail out insurance and banking "institutions", but that the authority granted by Congress did not extend to the bail out of the auto industry. Sure the bailout was necessary, but that does not mean that anything goes. As the SIGTARP report found, there was insufficient justification for the dealer cuts. Tomorrow I will post a link to the article. I am happy to speak with anyone who has questions about my proposed lawsuit. Just give me a call at 516-873-3000. By the way, there were 28 GM dealers who refused to sign the GM Wind-Down Agreement . These dealers are eligible to join my case as they did not release the Government from liability. If you know any of these 28, please pass the info along. Regards to all, Len Bellavia