Thursday, December 6, 2007

Judge Weinstein's Numerous Mass Torts & The "Related Case" Designation by Plaintiffs

Point of Law flags a recent story in the New York Sun -- Judge Lands at Center of a New York Legal Mystery, by Joseph Goldstein -- which chronicles the use of the "related-case" designation by plaintiff's lawyers to maneuver their cases before Judge Weinstein in the Eastern District of New York. 

I first encountered plaintiffs' use of this device as a lawyer for defendants in the Simon II tobacco case, which plaintiffs had put before Judge Weinstein as a "related case."  A court might justifiably want to keep related cases before a judge with related cases -- there's an argument that it's inefficient to educate multiple judges about the same complex factual and legal issues.  But the devil is in the details.  Take a look at the Eastern District of New York civil action cover sheet: Download js44-45.pdf .  The cover page has a section asking whether there are "RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY" and includes a line for Judge and Docket Number.  The plaintiff then has the ability to list any case and judge on the line, and then I believe the case is automatically routed to that judge. 

The problem is that there may be multiple judges in a district who have cases that are arguably related to the plaintiff's case.  The plaintiff might list whichever judge the plaintiff believes is most inclined to the plaintiff's position -- a system that biases judge selection in favor of plaintiffs.  And then as the article notes, the defendant may be held to have no standing to challenge the "related case" judge selection by plaintiffs, on the remarkable grounds that it is an administrative determination when in fact  the determination has been made not by an administrator or a judge, but by opposing counsel.  Imagine that the first judge plaintiffs get in a mass tort is one who they don't like; then when filing another case, they list no related case, and hope for another particular judge; finally, once the desired judge is obtained, then all future cases are checked as "related" to that cases before that desired judge only. 

A better system would be for plaintiffs lawyers to be informed that they are ethically bound to list every case and judge that counsel is aware the case might be reasonably considered related to.  If the "related case" box is checked, the court -- through administrators or a judge committee -- should undertake an independent review of whether any other cases and judges are implicated.  (For example, court administrators could circulate a weekly "related case" email to clerks, asking if their judges have any cases that are related.)  If several judges are involved in the cases, then the case should be randomly assigned among those judges -- unless the court makes its own decisions to centralize all cases before a single judge for administrative reasons.  Case assignment to judges is a decision that should be made by the court, not the litigants -- and certainly not only one type of litigant.

BGS

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/mass_tort_litigation/2007/12/judge-weinstein.html

Asbestos, Ethics, Procedure, Tobacco | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e54f9937ed8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Judge Weinstein's Numerous Mass Torts & The "Related Case" Designation by Plaintiffs:

» Judge Weinstein and the "related case" rule from PointOfLaw Forum
Byron Stier has some comments from personal experience. Earlier here.... [Read More]

Tracked on Dec 7, 2007 7:58:20 AM

» Judge Weinstein and the "related case" rule III from PointOfLaw Forum
Following up on my earlier post and Walter's note on Byron Stier's personal experience, let me add my own war story, complete with PACER citations to briefs I wrote nine and a half years ago.... [Read More]

Tracked on Dec 7, 2007 3:11:58 PM

Comments

Please help! Eli-Lilly is trying to force very small settlements on Dementia wrongful death. Eli-Lilly refuse to reconize my husband's wrongful death casused by zyprexa. I received a death cetificate cause of death , sudden cardiac death. I also have a determination for disability state dementia. It is criminal what the lawyers and Eli-Lilly is doing to helpless people. I was offered 15 Thousand dollars after lawyer fees and they refused to sign on a lawsuit funding for me because I will not sign the offer. My husband lived and died in Jackson Mississippi. Attroney General is fighting for the state, who is fighting for me

Posted by: yvonne mcgee | Jan 16, 2008 1:40:37 PM

Individual Justice in Mass Tort Litigation. (This is about Zyprexa, Dementia Wrongful death with punitive damages.) Explaining the phenomenon to the general public. Problems relating to the consolidating of multiple claimants with different individual injuries into one case. This is part of what was written in a paper by Hon. Jack Weinstein. He continue to write about attorney-client relationship... So I began to understand what has happened to me was known to happen!!!! Mass tort cases Judge Weinstein argues, requires new ethical rules and heightened standards of professional conduct that includes lawyers and judges assuming new roles as communicators and educators. Will I get my day in court if the lawyer have written my case without any evidence that I have given him or have charged me hundred of dollars for medical records that prove my case that he is not using. Why should I have to first sue the lawyer who should have gotten justice for me IN A COURT!!!!! Iam mad and hurt

Posted by: yvonne mcgee | Mar 17, 2008 11:40:49 PM

Post a comment