Mass Tort Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)

  • Home >
  • Issues >
  • Mass Tort Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)

Congress created Multidistrict Litigation proceedings (MDLs) in 1968 so that overlapping cases are centralized before a single judge for coordinated pre-trial proceedings, resulting in much more efficiency. Plaintiffs’ lawyers are also now using MDLs to bring meritless claims in the hopes that the sheer number of cases will pressure defendants into settlements. In 2018, 52 percent of all federal civil cases wound up in MDLs, of which about 90 percent were mass tort cases. Furthermore, the plaintiffs’ bar also groups together unrelated personal injury claims in multiple-plaintiff lawsuits as a trick to avoid federal jurisdiction, so the cases can be handled by a few “magnet” state courts. Read More...

A single judge can oversee tens of thousands of consolidated cases in a single MDL. This results in a very small amount of judges wielding an enormous amount of power over a majority of civil cases in federal courts. This creates a problem as MDL’s have different appeal rights for plaintiffs and defendants, where a plaintiff can immediately appeal a judge’s decision, and the defendant alternately has no timely or effective way to appeal. This ultimately leads to defendants being forced to settle. The current unequal treatment of defendants and plaintiffs is a clear imbalance that needs correction. In addition, the federal judiciary is looking at potentially changing the rules regarding MDL proceedings to help address this situation.

The Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) believes the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act (FICALA) will make a number of significant changes to the class action litigation system that turn MDLs into a mechanism of extracting strong-armed settlements from defendants. FICALA would ensure federal court jurisdiction to limit state court magnet MDL proceedings, and mandate evidentiary support for plaintiffs’ claims to avoid baseless proceedings.

Suggested Resources

Research
  • MDL Imbalance: Why Defendants Need Timely Access To Interlocutory Review

    MDL Imbalance: Why Defendants Need Timely Access To Interlocutory Review

    April 24, 2019

    Multidistrict litigation proceedings (MDLs) were created as an efficient way to handle pretrial proceedings in hundreds or thousands of similar cases against the same defendant. Unfortunately, MDLs also give plaintiffs an unfair advantage when it comes to appeals. If a defendant makes a dispositive motion-on preemption or expert evidence, for example-and is denied, it won't normally have access to immediate appeal. But if the defendant wins the motion, plaintiffs can appeal right away. This paper argues for courts to give MDL plaintiffs and defendants equal access to appellate review. Read More

  • <i>BMS</i>   Battlegrounds: Practical Advice for Litigating Personal Jurisdiction After Bristol-Myers

    BMS Battlegrounds: Practical Advice for Litigating Personal Jurisdiction After Bristol-Myers

    June 04, 2018

    The U.S. Supreme Court's decision last year in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court was a clear statement that the days of blatant, unchecked plaintiff forum shopping in search of outsized verdicts are at an end. ILR's research explores this paradigm shift and provides practical advice for defendants litigating BMS in the trenches. Read More

All Results for Mass Tort Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)

  1. Senate Committee Scrutinizes Widespread Abuses of Civil Justice System

    November 08, 2017 | Blogs

    Today, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing to examine the impact of lawsuit abuse on America's small businesses and job creators.... Read More

  2. In the News Today - October 18, 2017

    October 18, 2017 | News and Blog

    Md. Asbestos Attys Clash Over Backlog At State Senate; Johnson & Johnson wins reversal of $72 million verdict over talc cancer risks... Read More

  3. In the News Today - August 21, 2017

    August 21, 2017 | News and Blog

    Jury Hands J&J, Bayer Win In 3rd Xarelto Bellwether: A Mississippi federal jury found for the defendants in the third bellwether trial over Xarelto. This was third bellwether trial over the litigation. The defendants have won all three. ... Read More

  4. The ILR Research Review - Spring 2017

    May 08, 2017 | Research

    This edition of the ILR Research Review offers valuable insights from ILR's recent research on the latest trends in litigation and the tactics and strategies entrepreneurial plaintiffs' firms are using to expand their business models and bring more lawsuits in local, state, federal, and international courts.... Read More

  5. A Handful of Plaintiffs' Lawyers Dominate MDL Litigation

    April 28, 2017 | News and Blog

    A recent story from Reuters writes that consolidated multidistrict litigation (MDL) "comprised 36 percent of the entire civil caseload of the federal court system in 2014, up from 16 percent in 2002."... Read More

  6. The Food Court: Trends in Food and Beverage Class Action Litigation

    February 24, 2017 | Research

    This paper examines the emerging litigation trends in the food and beverage industry and makes concrete recommendations for reforms, outlining the role that the courts, legislatures, and regulatory agencies all have in restoring common sense to food class action litigation.... Read More

  7. MDL Proceedings: Eliminating the Chaff

    October 27, 2015 | Research

    This paper suggests procedural improvements to weed out dubious and fraudulent claims in the early stages of multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceedings to prevent them from becoming "lawsuit magnets."... Read More

  8. Lawsuit Ecosystem II: New Trends, Targets and Players

    December 04, 2014 | Research

    This report, authored by a distinguished group of practitioners, explores the evolving lawsuit "ecosystem." It considers how plaintiffs' lawyers generate litigation and significant developments that will spur more lawsuits or rein in excessive liability.... Read More



1969-12-31