“In this instance, Plaintiff has solicited the opinion of a notice expert who has provided the Court with extensive information explaining and supporting the Plaintiff’s notice plan…After balancing the factors laid out in Rule 1712(a), I find that Plaintiff’s publication method is the method most reasonably calculated to inform the class members of the pending action.”

Judge Louis J. Farina, Soders v. General Motors Corp., (October 31, 2003) No. CI-00-04255, (Ct. of Common Pleas PA):

“Plaintiff provided extensive information regarding the reach of their proposed plan . . . their plan will reach 84.8% of the class members.  Defendant provided the Court with no information regarding the potential reach of their proposed plan…There is no doubt that some class members will remain unaware of the litigation, however, on balance, the Plaintiff’s plan is likely to reach as many class members as the Defendant’s plan at less than half the cost.  As such, I approve the Plaintiff’s publication based plan.” 

Hilsoft Notifications was called upon to study name and address issues and to determine the best practicable method and form of notice for a class certified against GM in the State of Pennsylvania leading up to an exclusion deadline before trial.

Hilsoft Notifications studied mailing issues, including whether the names and addresses known were likely to be up to date and current, whether sending notices to old “last known addresses” would be effective, and whether publication notice could reach more people than mailings if audience data was scrutinized carefully and noticeable notices were placed in the proper media.  Hilsoft Notifications engaged in analyses and studied responsive filings, responded to them, and underwent deposition and gave live comments to the Judge overseeing the litigation, in the face of stiff opposition to notice by publication.  Hilsoft Notifications documented how modern-style publication notice program design and content could overcome the problems in previous automotive situations bearing resemblance to this case.  Hilsoft Notifications plan was shown to reach more people than the opposing plan for less money.  The court ruled in favor of the notice program designed by Hilsoft Notifications.  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ultimately rejected an appeal on the notice issues which enabled the notice program to move forward.