Becoming a Master of Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)

Imagine a situation where people across various locations have similar legal complaints, like issues with a dangerous drug or inadequate lighting in a public space. Instead of having these cases scattered across several jurisdictions, there’s a process that allows the pretrial and discovery phases to be grouped together in one court to save time and money.

Multidistrict litigation, also known as MDL, is a lot less complicated than people think. In fact, it’s a practical tool for streamlining processes, saving time, and reducing costs.

What Is Multidistrict Litigation?

The main goal of MDL is to increase efficiency without sacrificing fairness. By using multidistrict litigation (MDL), one judge manages the pretrial and discovery phases where evidence is gathered, helping to avoid the chaos of differing rulings and procedures that could result from separate lawsuits. This consolidation is crucial for managing large volumes of evidence and witnesses. It also significantly reduces the time and resources needed for the courts and the involved parties.

MDL is particularly beneficial for cases like mass accidents or dangerous drug claims, where the scope is vast and the stakes are high. Once this phase is complete, cases might be sent back to their original courts for trial unless they are resolved earlier.

What’s the Difference Between MDL and Class Actions?

MDL and class action lawsuits are often confused, but they have fundamental differences. For example, in a class action, one lawsuit is filed on behalf of many people who have been similarly affected. All members of the class are treated as a single group, and any settlement or judgment is divided among them equally, regardless of individual circumstances.

On the other hand, MDL focuses on efficiency by centralizing the pretrial process without merging all cases into one, as is done in a class action. Also, unlike a class action, MDL involves grouping similar cases for pretrial proceedings, but it maintains each case as separate. This approach allows for individual trials and potentially different outcomes for each plaintiff based on their specific situation.

The Benefits of MDL

By consolidating similar cases under one court, MDL significantly reduces the duplication of efforts when multiple courts are independently managing the same information. This means parties don’t have to repeatedly gather the same evidence or conduct multiple depositions, which lowers legal expenses. Likewise, in many cases, discovery witnesses and professionals only have to testify once rather than multiple times in different courts. This reduces the burden on them and cuts down on associated costs for all parties involved.

Sharing resources among plaintiffs can also decrease individual costs. For defendants, MDL minimizes the need to defend similar claims across different courts, cutting down on legal fees and logistical expenses. It also helps avoid conflicting rulings on similar issues, which can occur when cases are dispersed across various jurisdictions.

The centralized approach also reduces court congestion, leading to faster case progression and, consequently, lower costs associated with prolonged litigation. On a similar note, by streamlining procedures, MDL encourages early settlements, which can save all parties time and money. Similarly, the centralized pretrial proceedings in MDL can lead to faster case resolution, providing essential justice for plaintiffs.

Common Misconceptions About MDL

One common misconception about multidistrict litigation is that it combines all cases into a single trial. In reality, MDL centralizes only the pretrial processes, such as discovery and motion practice. After these stages, cases might be returned to their original courts for trial unless settled or dismissed beforehand.

Another frequent misunderstanding is that MDL is only for federal cases. While it’s true that MDL occurs in federal courts, similar processes can happen at the state level, often called state coordination.

There is also a common notion that plaintiffs lose control over their cases in MDL, fearing decisions will be made without their input. However, plaintiffs still play a strong role throughout the legal process.

Types of MDL Cases

The MDL approach enhances judicial efficiency while facilitating quicker settlements. Real-world examples include litigation over drugs like Vioxx or opioids, where numerous plaintiffs allege harm.

MDL ensures that similar claims are collectively addressed, promoting fair and uniform resolutions for affected parties. Types of cases where MDL can provide major advantages include:

• Employment law
• Securities fraud
• Dangerous drugs
• Antitrust cases
• Defective products
• Consumer fraud
• Environment damage
• Mass accidents

Is Your Website Getting Enough Leads?

At SLS Consulting, Inc., our client websites have a conversion rate of five to seven percent. That’s much higher than the industry average of only two to three percent. To learn more about how we can help your law firm, call (323) 254-1510 and schedule a FREE consultation today.