Mistaking a dead claimant for a live one

For a lawyer to do that once might seem bad luck, to do it 588 times seems rather like carelessness. [Beck on Eleventh Circuit review of Engle tobacco cases in Florida] Excerpt:

The district court displayed the patience of Job – for a long time it tried to get the plaintiffs to do after filing, what Rule 11 requires them to do beforehand, that is, to perform basic investigation of their cases. …

The court held, with remarkable restraint, that counsel’s inability to track down its own clients before the Engel filing deadline “was at least partially a problem of its own making” because they “signed up so many clients.” …

Maybe Engle Cases is an extreme example, but the problem this litigation exemplifies – massive solicitation of would-be plaintiffs, combined with utter disregard of pre-filing obligations such as Rule 11 – is present in just about every mass tort. In Engle Cases, out of the “4500 cases” originally filed, in the end “we are dealing with 29 ? and heading to 26.” The dirty little not-so-secret of mass tort practice is that the great majority (here it looks like more than 99%) of the cases clogging up the courts would be thrown out with little or no discovery if brought individually.

2 Comments

  • I don’t see why lawyers should be penalized just because dead people are too lazy to opt out of class action suits.

    Bob

  • Boblipton, I could be wrong, but I don’t think this was class action or opt-out. It was just a ton of plaintiffs in one suit. Except then there were so many that the plaintiff’s attorneys couldn’t keep track of things like who was dead and who never authorized them to file a suit and who had claims that they really needed to take some other action on before the statute of limitations ran out.