What is MDL? | Multidistrict Litigation Explained by Personal Injury Lawyers [2024 Guide]

MDL: Definition and Purpose

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a special legal procedure designed to handle complex cases involving numerous plaintiffs across different federal districts.

This procedure aims to streamline the process and make it more efficient when multiple lawsuits share common factual issues (i.e., dealing with the same defendant).

When multiple lawsuits filed in different federal courts involve similar questions of fact, any party or the court can request that these cases be consolidated.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), a group of seven federal judges formed by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, decides whether to centralize the cases and, if so, selects a single federal district court and MDL judge to handle them.

The primary intent behind the formation of MDLs is to eliminate repetitive discovery processes.

This legal action prevents conflicting pre-trial rulings and preserves the resources of all parties involved.

Centralization aims to make the pre-trial proceedings more efficient without affecting the parties’ rights to hear their cases individually.

What Is the Purpose of MDL?

The primary purpose of MDL is to centralize the civil procedure of like-natured cases while maintaining the fair distribution of multidistrict litigation settlements.

It simplifies and speeds up the legal process of multiple lawsuits.

Consolidating cases in an MDL allows for coordinated discovery processes.

This consolidated discovery prevents duplicative efforts and reduces the burden on courts and parties by having a single set of depositions, document requests, and interrogatories.

Another benefit of centralizing multiple similar lawsuits is that it conserves judicial resources by reducing the number of judges handling the same issues separately, thereby lightening the caseload in numerous districts.

Having a lead counsel or one judge oversee pre-trial motions and rulings ensures uniform decisions on similar legal issues, reducing the risk of conflicting rulings across different jurisdictions.

MDLs also deliver financial benefits for plaintiffs as they reduce legal fees and expenses due to consolidated efforts in pre-trial litigation.

In terms of settlement or compensation, MDLs allow for global settlement discussions and resolutions that might not be possible in individual cases.

Settlements in MDLs can provide a structured and predictable process for compensating large numbers of plaintiffs.

Examples of Cases in MDLs

Examples of civil cases that can be formed into an MDL typically involve widespread issues affecting many plaintiffs across different jurisdictions.

Several types of cases commonly seen in MDLs include:

• Pharmaceutical Drug Litigation: When a medication causes harmful side effects or fails to deliver its promised results, those who suffer injuries may file lawsuits.
• Medical Device Litigation: Similar to pharmaceutical drugs, medical devices that cause harm or fail to work as intended can lead to numerous lawsuits.
• Product Liability: When a manufacturer releases a defective product that harms consumers, victims of defective products will likely file lawsuits with similar facts.
• Consumer Fraud: Cases of fraud, false advertising, or deceptive business practices that affect numerous individuals can be consolidated into an MDL.
• Environmental Disasters: When a company’s actions lead to widespread environmental damage and harm to communities, multiple lawsuits may arise.
• Data Breaches: Large-scale data breaches that affect numerous people can lead to numerous lawsuits, which the JPML may consider consolidating into an MDL.
• Aviation Disasters: When a plane crash or other aviation accident occurs, numerous families and victims may file lawsuits against the airline or manufacturer.
• Securities Fraud: When investors suffer losses due to fraudulent actions by companies, multiple lawsuits may be consolidated into an MDL.

A quick Google search will tell you if your case or potential case is already included in an MDL.

If you’re unsure, consult an experienced civil procedure lawyer to discuss your legal options.

As mentioned, TorHoerman Law’s team of personal injury attorneys has handled numerous MDLs in the past and are currently involved in MDLs for several high-profile cases.

How MDL Cases Are Organized and Developed

MDL cases are organized by consolidating similar individual lawsuits into a single district court to streamline pretrial proceedings and improve efficiency.

This process allows for coordinated discovery and pretrial rulings, helping to manage complex litigation involving numerous plaintiffs and defendants effectively.

MDL Formation

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation spearheads the formation of MDLs.

The specific process might slightly differ in various cases but generally goes as follows:

1. Petition to form an MDL: When lawyers notice an influx of cases involving similar factual and legal issues filed in multiple federal courts, they may file a motion to transfer the cases into an MDL.
2. Consideration by the JPML: The panel reviews the motion and considers relevant factors such as common factual issues, jurisdictional overlap, potential efficiencies, and opposition from parties. The panel then decides whether to consolidate the civil lawsuits or not.
3. Formation of MDL: If the JPML decides to consolidate the cases, they will transfer them to a single federal district court, which will become the MDL court.
4. Selection of the MDL Judge: The JPML also chooses an experienced federal judge to oversee and manage the pre-trial proceedings for all transferred cases.
5. Formation of Steering Committee: MDLs are usually handled by a steering committee, which comprises plaintiffs’ lawyers responsible for coordinating the cases and representing all litigants in matters affecting all parties. If there are multiple defendants, they may also form their own steering committee.
6. Coordination of Discovery Process: The MDL judge leads the discovery process, including setting schedules for depositions, document production, and expert witness testimony, among others.
7. The Start of Bellwether Trials: After the completion of pre-trial proceedings, MDL courts typically choose a few cases to be tried before juries. These are bellwether trials and serve as test cases for future settlement negotiations.
8. Resolution: In most cases, multiple bellwether trials would be necessary before a global settlement is reached. Individual cases may be remanded back to their original district courts for trial if no settlement is reached.

Case Management

Once all the like-natured cases are consolidated into a single MDL, the presiding judge oversees all pre-trial matters, including discovery and settlement negotiations.

The judge works with both parties to ensure the litigation process remains efficient and fair.

The judge will also handle other issues, such as motions to dismiss or motions for summary judgment.

These pre-trial proceedings aim to narrow down the issues and evidence that both parties will use in the trial.

The MDL judge plays a vital role in managing the cases and working with all parties involved to reach a fair resolution.

The steering committee also helps coordinate the overall litigation process by communicating with all the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ lawyers, sharing information, and strategizing how to handle the cases effectively.

This coordinated movement is essential in ensuring the cases move forward efficiently and effectively.

Depending on the complexity of the cases and any settlement negotiations that may occur, the MDL process can take many months or even years.

MDL vs Class Action Lawsuits: Why Are They Confusing?

Multidistrict litigation is often interchanged with class action lawsuits because of their perceived similarities.

While both civil actions deal with mass amounts of cases centered on the similar issues, they differ significantly in structure, procedures, and outcomes.

In an MDL, multiple individual lawsuits from different jurisdictions are consolidated into a single district court for pre-trial proceedings.

Each plaintiff in an MDL retains the individuality of their lawsuits, and they may push individual trials to their original courts if the MDL is dismissed.

In a class action lawsuit, there’s only a single lawsuit filed on behalf of a group (class) of people with similar claims.

The court must certify the class, confirming that the plaintiffs meet specific criteria (commonality, adequacy, typicality, and numerosity).

The class action is treated as one unified lawsuit, and any judgment or settlement applies to all class members.

MDLs also allow individual plaintiffs to negotiate their settlement.

If they don’t agree with the global settlement, they may return to their original courts to pursue a trial.

All cases in an MDL don’t guarantee similar results, as they’re still independent cases.

In class action lawsuits, the judgment for one is the judgment for all.

Unless they decide to opt out, all class members are bound to face similar outcomes.

When settlement is provided, the amount is divided equally between class members regardless of the differences in the cases.

MDLs and class action lawsuits both serve to manage large-scale litigation efficiently, but they do so in different ways.

MDLs maintain individual lawsuits within a centralized pre-trial framework, while class actions consolidate claims into a single representative lawsuit.

Understanding these differences helps determine the most appropriate mechanism for handling various types of complex litigation.

MDLs TorHoerman Law Has Handled or Participated In

At TorHoerman Law, our legal team has extensive experience handling complex multidistrict litigation against prominent and established companies.

We have represented thousands of clients in various multidistrict litigations nationwide, including pharmaceutical and medical device cases involving dangerous drugs and defective devices.

From dangerous chemical exposures to defective medical devices and social media side effects, TorHoerman Law is at the forefront of multidistrict litigation.

Our most recent MDL cases include:

• AFFF Lawsuit (Firefighting Foam)
• Paragard Lawsuit (IUDs)
• Ozempic Lawsuit (Diabetes Medication Used Off-Label for Weight Loss)
• Powerport Lawsuit (Medical Device)
• Social Media Lawsuit (Mental Health Impacts on Users)
• Roundup Lawsuit (Herbicide)

AFFF Lawsuit (Firefighting Foam)

The aqueous firefighting foam (AFFF) lawsuit is legal action against prominent AFFF manufacturers, such as 3M, DuPont, and Chemours.

The lawsuit alleges that AFFF contains the carcinogenic chemical per and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as the forever chemical, which contaminates drinking water and causes various health problems.

As of now, the case is still ongoing, but TorHoerman Law is actively representing clients who have been affected by PFAS contamination from AFFF.

Learn More About the AFFF Lawsuit

Paragard Lawsuit (IUDs)

The Paragard IUD or intrauterine device is a non-hormonal alternative to other birth control methods.

Hundreds of women have filed lawsuits against the manufacturer, primarily Teva Pharmaceuticals, for severe injuries caused by the IUD.

The suit alleges that Paragard’s design causes breakage during removal, leading to complications such as perforation of organs and infertility.

Our legal team is actively representing clients in this MDL.

Learn More About the Paragard Lawsuit

Ozempic Lawsuit (Diabetes Medication Used Off-Label for Weight Loss)

Ozempic is a popular weight-loss medication allegedly used by numerous celebrities and famous personalities.

Although the drug was approved to treat type 2 diabetes, it’s being prescribed off-label for weight loss.

Recent studies have linked Ozempic to serious side effects such as stomach paralysis and severe bowel problems.

Our team is currently representing clients in this MDL and fighting for justice for those harmed by this drug.

Learn More About the Ozempic Lawsuit

PowerPort Lawsuit (Medical Device)

PowerPort is a medical device used for chemotherapy and other treatments that require frequent injections.

Numerous patients have suffered severe injuries from the device, such as blood clots and infections.

The lawsuit alleges that the manufacturer, Bard Access Systems Inc., failed to warn patients of these potential risks and defects in the design of the device.

TorHoerman Law is currently representing clients in this MDL.

Learn More About the PowerPort Lawsuit

Social Media Lawsuit (Mental Health Impacts on Users)

By far, the most popular legal action of the year 2024, the social media lawsuit, alleges that major social media platforms (i.e., Meta, X, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube) have caused severe mental health issues in users.

The lawsuit claims that the platforms use algorithms and targeted advertising to manipulate user behavior and create addictive tendencies.

Our legal team is actively involved in this MDL and fighting for the rights of individuals affected by social media.

Learn More About the Social Media Lawsuit

Roundup Lawsuit (Herbicide)

Roundup is a renowned herbicide used by farmers, landscapers, and homeowners.

Numerous studies have linked the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, to an increased risk of cancer.

Thousands of individuals have filed lawsuits against the manufacturer, Monsanto Company (now owned by Bayer AG).

Our team at TorHoerman Law is actively representing clients in this ongoing MDL.

Learn More About the Roundup Lawsuit

How MDL Benefit Plaintiffs

MDLs offer a breadth of benefits to plaintiffs bringing claims against large companies and organizations, but it all boils down to two significant advantages: case resolution efficiency and equal legal footing.

Efficiency and Expertise

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) provides a robust framework for managing complex litigation involving numerous plaintiffs with similar claims across different jurisdictions.

This centralized approach offers several key advantages, leading to more consistent rulings and a more efficient legal process.

As reiterated, MDLs consolidate pre-trial activities, such as discovery, into a single proceeding.

This centralization avoids duplicative efforts and ensures all parties access the same evidence and testimony.

With one judge handling all pre-trial rulings, MDLs ensure that decisions on key legal issues, such as the admissibility of evidence or the interpretation of laws, are consistent across all cases.

Consistent rulings provide predictability for plaintiffs and defendants, helping them make informed decisions about settlements and trial strategies.

Centralizing cases conserves judicial resources by reducing the number of judges and courts involved in handling similar pre-trial issues.

Parties save on legal fees and expenses through consolidated efforts, shared discovery costs, and coordinated legal strategies.

Access to Justice

Multidistrict litigation also plays a crucial role in leveling the playing field for individual plaintiffs when facing large corporations or dealing with complex legal issues.

By pooling resources and expertise, MDLs offer several advantages that help plaintiffs pursue their claims more effectively.

MDLs often attract highly experienced and specialized legal teams with the expertise to handle complex litigation.

Individual plaintiffs benefit from the strategic planning and knowledge of these seasoned attorneys.

Access to leading experts in various fields becomes more affordable and feasible.

Expert testimony is crucial in cases involving technical or scientific issues, such as pharmaceutical litigation or environmental disasters.

MDL cases also create opportunities for large-scale settlements to compensate all plaintiffs involved.

Defendants often prefer to resolve all claims in a single, comprehensive settlement rather than face numerous individual lawsuits.

The centralized nature of MDLs helps in organizing and distributing settlement funds efficiently, ensuring fair compensation for all plaintiffs.

Through shared costs, access to top legal and expert support, and enhanced negotiation power, MDLs provide a structured and efficient path to justice for those who might otherwise struggle to pursue their claims.

This collective approach ensures that individual plaintiffs can compete equally with well-funded corporations, ultimately leading to fairer and more equitable outcomes.

TorHoerman Law: Talk to Our Personal Injury Lawyers Today

Multidistrict litigations provide an easier and more accessible approach for numerous victims to pursue compensation for their injuries.

With its centralized and consolidated approach, the process is cut short to ensure more efficient and faster resolution.

This legal approach also provides an even ground for victims without the resources to pursue their claims individually.

With the collective power of numerous plaintiffs, MDL offers a more straightforward path for victims to access justice.

At TorHoerman Law, we have successfully handled various MDL cases and class action lawsuits, securing significant client settlements.

Our experienced personal injury lawyers have the expertise and resources to navigate complex litigation effectively.

If you want to know if your case can be part of an MDL or a class action lawsuit, contact us today for a free consultation.

You can also use our chatbot to find out if you instantly qualify for a case.