What is a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)?
- Last Updated: August 25th, 2023
Attorney Jessica Paluch-Hoerman, founder of TruLaw, has over 28 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.
Legally Reviewed
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.
Fact-Checked
TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
What is a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)?
Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is a robust procedural tool developed in order to streamline the process of complex litigation involving several (to thousands) of alleged victims of a single or similar set of wrongs.
Over 90% of Multidistrict litigations (MDLs) are relatively small cases, often involving the coordination of only a few cases, but, over 90% of plaintiffs in MDLs are in a small number of massive, complex cases with hundreds or thousands of plaintiffs.
We refer to these MDLs as mass tort cases (although not all mass tort cases will be selected for an MDL).
Mass tort MDLs are often very complex and involve many plaintiffs.
Table of Contents
How does the Multidistrict Litigation process work?
In many situations, the process of litigating each of these cases in different courtrooms would lead to the inefficient use of court time and duplicate work required by courts around the country.
The determination of whether Multidistrict litigation is appropriate for any given litigation is made by a United States Judicial Panel referred to as the MDL Panel.
The MDL panel is governed by 28 U.S.C. Section 1407 and is comprised of seven sitting federal judges, who are appointed to serve on the Panel by the Chief Justice of the United States.
The MDL Panel has the job of determining whether civil actions pending in different federal districts involve one or more common question of fact such so that the transferring to a single federal district court would promote the just and efficient conduct of the actions.
The MDL panel selects a “transferee” district and judge to coordinate pretrial proceedings.
It is important to understand that your case may be transferred to a court that is far removed from you.
Unless you are selected as a bellwether trial (and this is generally a very small percentage of cases), the location of this courtroom should not impact you and should not be concerning.
Remember that product liability cases (drug, device and toxic torts) are complex and the defendants are generally the largest and most profitable of U.S. companies, tackling a lawsuit as a single plaintiff would be difficult if not impossible.
The goal of the MDL is to route cases to the best court to oversee all the early proceedings which should speed up your lawsuit and give us more data points to decide the best way to handle your lawsuit.
Cases that are not settled or dismissed during the MDL proceedings are remanded (transferred back) to the originating court for trial at the conclusion of the pretrial proceedings.
No two MDL proceedings are alike since the responsibility of leading the litigation is in the hands of the transferee judge who will set the goals/plans of the MDL proceeding.
The early goals/plans of the MDL will be to set the rules and time frame for discovery and pretrial activities as well as set up a bellwether trial plan in an effort towards moving all of the cases toward settlement or trial/remand.
Managing Attorney & Owner
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share the most reliable, accurate, and up-to-date legal information with our readers!
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.
Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.
Depo Provera Lawsuit claims are being filed by individuals who allege they developed meningioma (a type of brain tumor) after receiving Depo-Provera birth control injections.
A 2024 study found that women using Depo-Provera for at least 1 year are five times more likely to develop meningioma brain tumors compared to those not using the drug.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.
Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.
Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.
Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.
Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.
Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).
Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.
Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?