What Are Class Action Lawsuits?
Most of us have heard the term “class action lawsuit” either from a TV commercial or related to a famous case such as the one behind the 2000 movie Erin Brokovich, and many of us have personally received a mailed notice of eligibility to opt-into a class action lawsuit. For example, Amazon distributed mass notices several years ago regarding digital books purchased via a Kindle, followed many months later by notices to plaintiffs regarding the related credit to their Kindle accounts.
What Are Mass Tort Cases?
Meanwhile, the term “mass torts” is lesser known, with some people unaware of its meaning or assuming the term is interchangeable with class action lawsuits. In truth, these are two lawsuit types that share similarities and differences. Both begin with a group of people experiencing damages or harm caused by the same triggering event, or a single set of circumstances. Therefore, both create collective bargaining power for their plaintiffs and increase the likelihood of pre-trial settlements by illustrating the potential volume of damages and harm caused by the defendant(s). Class actions and mass torts also allow the courts to efficiently manage cases by combining some or all proceedings, or by combining the cases themselves.
Comparing Mass Tort and Class Action Cases
The most noticeable difference between the two types of lawsuits is the court’s treatment of the plaintiff. A group of people who experience a shared triggering event may suffer damages and injuries that are similar and handled through a single class action lawsuit. Mass torts provide individualized attention to each plaintiff who suffered distinct damages and injuries, requiring each case be considered separately–even though some or all court proceedings may be combined. Let’s walk through these two types of lawsuits to evaluate their similarities and differences.
Comparing Mass Tort Lawsuits and Class Action Lawsuits
Mass Tort Lawsuits |
Class Action Lawsuits |
|
|
Definition |
Enables one attorney or group of attorneys to represent multiple plaintiffs in multiple individual cases with the same triggering event but varying damages and injuries.
Therefore, mass torts typically encompass personal injury or specific product liability cases within five categories where plaintiffs may experience varying injuries: – Dangerous products – Exposure to toxic substances – Large-scale catastrophes: fires, building collapses – Defective drugs and medical devices: harm caused by an issue with the drug or device and/or failure to warn of known risks – Natural disasters: tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. |
Consolidates uniform complaints against a shared defendant(s) into a single claim filed by a designated law firm on behalf of a plaintiff group. The plaintiffs are impacted by the same triggering event and endured similar damages and injuries, allowing them to be treated as a “class”.
Class actions can cover a breadth of cases. A few common examples include: – Company data breaches exposing personal identification information of customers. – Employees subjected to discrimination, not paid overtime. – Customers paying inflated prices due to company antitrust violations. |
|
Purpose |
Leverage some collective “power” by filing a volume of cases caused by the same triggering event against the same defendant(s) in a narrow timeframe.
The structure of individual cases allows for the variation in plaintiff harm–and potential compensation. Cases are typically personal injury or medical-related product liability cases (e.g., same medical device defect may necessitate one plaintiff’s corrective surgery and cause death of another plaintiff’s loved one). |
Leverage collective “power” by combining claims into one case to hold a corporation accountable for negligence or business malpractices that might otherwise be difficult without collective evidence, implausible due to small individual dollar claims, etc.
For many plaintiffs, a class action may serve as the only option for justice and any compensation due to cost/benefit analysis of an individual case for a small individual compensation amount. |
|
Plaintiffs |
Each plaintiff is treated as an individual by courts, with compensation reflecting specific damages.
Each case requires time commitment by its plaintiff and allows the individual a voice in the outcome. |
The courts treat all plaintiffs as one entity with little to no individual say in the case settlement.
Case requires limited time or involvement (with the exception of “lead plaintiff”) but provides minimal to zero voice regarding the outcome. |
|
Attorneys |
Mass tort litigation allows an attorney(s) to represent several injured parties in individual cases. All of the attorneys may share investigative materials, information, and ideas. | The people in the class must be notified of the lawsuit and provided with the choice to opt out or choose private counsel. |
|
Courts |
For the overlapping parts of the cases, the courts are able to efficiently consolidate pre-trial discoveries into multidistrict litigation (MDL). Using MDL typically increases the likelihood of a pre-trial settlement, but in the absence of a settlement, the cases are returned to individual districts for trials. | Courts are able to efficiently handle large volumes of cases arising from the same triggering event by using one case that is representative for each plaintiff. |
|
Case Example |
Cipollone v. Liggett Group
(commonly known as the “Big Tobacco cases”) |
Anderson, et al. v. Pacific Gas & Electric
(commonly known as the “Erin Brokovich case” |
Two Examples to Illustrate These Types of Lawsuits
Class Action Lawsuit Example
Alleged antitrust violations by Apple and digital book companies
Trigger Event
The alleged trigger event–all defendants denied wrongdoing but paid settlements to resolve the allegations–was an ebook price fixing conspiracy.
Plaintiffs
Multiple class action lawsuits were filed on behalf of consumer groups purchasing digital books through various digital reader platforms (Kindle, Nook, iBook, etc.)
Claims
The lawsuits claimed that upon Apple entering the digital book market–a space completely dominated by Amazon to that point–the company colluded with the book publishers to set prices above Amazon’s $9.99 and limit the discounts retailers could offer, resulting in overpayment by consumers.
Defendants
Lawsuits were filed against five book publishing houses (Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Simon & Schuster, Penguin Group and MacMillan) and Apple.
Settlement
This ebook class action resulted in each ebook consumer receiving a standard restitution for each ebook purchased during the specified time period: $3.17 for each New York Times bestseller and $0.73 for each non-bestseller.
Mass Torts Lawsuit Example
The Surfside condominium building collapse
Trigger Event
In 2021, approximately half of the Champlain Towers South (the “Towers”) condominium building in Surfside, Florida, collapsed in the early morning hours with widely ranging damages and injuries.
Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs encompass condo owners, condo renters, and family members
– Some condo owners not on site during the collapse experienced only economic damages due to loss of their condos and belongings.
– Some tenants–both condo owners and renters–were inside Champlain Towers South, many sleeping. Some safely escaped, but many of these surviving tenants have suffered PTSD symptoms. Ninety-eight people did not safely escape, leaving behind family members.
– For some tenants–both renters and owners, the Towers condo was their only residence, and they were literally displaced in the middle of the night.
– Since only a portion of the building collapsed, some tenants whose condos were in the standing section of the Towers were able to return to their condos to collect their belongings. Others with condos in the collapsed part of the Towers lost all of their belongings.
– Ultimately, all condo owners lost their condos after rescue teams proactively demolished the entire building to avoid additional damages and injuries from a believed impending collapse.
Defendants
The case was brought against 20 defendants, including the developer and general contractor of a recently constructed residential high-rise next door, the security company that managed the Towers’ safety systems, and engineering and architectural firms involved in property development and maintenance, the town of Surfside, the Champlain Towers South Condominium Association, and the Association’s law firm representing the organization before the building collapse.
Claims
The lawsuits argued that the Towers’ poor construction and lack of proper maintenance turned catastrophic with a new luxury tower’s construction next door. The lawsuits accused the Towers’ Condominium Association, architects, engineers, and the City of Surfside (related to the town building inspector’s involvement) of negligence for failing to address serious structural problems known since 2018.
They also alleged the 2016 construction of a new luxury condo building next door destabilized the Towers when metal sheet piles were driven into the ground approximately 12 feet from its perimeter pool deck wall–the wall that detached from the structure to begin the Surfside collapse.
| Since this case settled, a federal investigation team has published preliminary findings stating the condo’s concrete columns and pool deck had deficiencies and construction errors due to the concrete being cast in a way leaving it permeable to water, which corroded the steel reinforcement. Plus, improperly placed rebar in the pool deck’s incorrectly cast concrete slabs weakened those sections below building codes. |
Settlement
In June 2022, a judge approved a $1.2 billion settlement, creating a fund available to victims of combined payments from insurance claims, the anticipated multimillion-dollar property sale, and a $2 million donation from the City of Surfside. Families of the victims were then able to submit claim forms to receive compensation from the settlement fund.