A Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is a solution to the problem of having a lot of similar pending cases divided in different jurisdictions. The Judicial Panel of Multidistrict Litigation selects cases which are similar and prevalent in the country and approves if the case is large enough in magnitude to qualify as a candidate for Multidistrict Litigation. The compounded case is then presided over by a “transferee judge” usually in another district. This judge then is in charge of approving the candidate cases which may or may not belong to the MDL. After this, the case can now be litigated as one in court.
The origin of Multidistrict Litigation is fairly new. In 1986, the bill was passed to enable an umbrella case to cover several others. This was an answer to a mounting number of pending cases that were more or less the same (a single corporation as a defendant accused of similar offense by several different individuals) but had been scattered in different jurisdictions. These cases would then be reviewed and if they are indeed the same they are then assimilated into the Multidistrict litigation. The new MDL would hasten the processing of the various cases.
Presently, Multidistrict Litigation is commonly used to aid product liability suits and other such cases that tend to cover a wide number of individuals. The main advantage of an MDL is that the pace is quickened by the fact that the filing process is done all at once. The attorneys also get to acquaint themselves with others and get to know what the new improvements in similar cases are.
Both class action suits and single plaintiff aces are eligible for assimilation into an MDL. The transferee judge only has to certify that you have the right to ask something from the defendant and then you’re good to go.
MDL’s can be a faster option for your pending hip replacement case than going through the process of reopening it. Get in touch with your hip replacement lawyer and ask about the pros and cons of an MDL.
No comments:
Post a Comment