Mass Tort Cases: The Intersection of Science, Medicine, and Law

January 26, 2024

Mass Tort Cases: The Intersection of Science, Medicine, and Law

When we talk about the intersection of science, medicine, and law, we are usually referring to mass tort cases. These types of cases involve a large number of plaintiffs who have been harmed by a common product or action, and who file a lawsuit against the responsible party. These cases can be incredibly complex, requiring a deep understanding of the science and medicine behind the injury, as well as the legal principles involved. We will delve into the world of mass tort cases and explore how science, medicine, and law come together to seek justice for those who have been harmed.


Let's start by defining mass tort. These cases involve a large number of plaintiffs who have been harmed by a common product or action. The harm can be physical, such as in cases involving defective medical devices, or environmental, such as in cases involving widespread water contamination. The plaintiffs may come from different geographic locations and have varying degrees of injury, but they are all filing suit against the same defendant. This may sound similar to class action lawsuits but they are fundamentally different. In the case of a class action lawsuit, the plaintiff(s) file and prosecute a lawsuit on the behalf of a large group of people (the “class”). In mass tort cases, victims are seen as individual lawsuits, whereas a class action is a part of a collective whole. 


In these cases, science and medicine are essential components of the proceedings. The plaintiffs must prove that the defendant's product or action caused their injuries, and this requires a deep understanding of the science and medicine behind the harm. For example, in a case involving a defective medical device, the plaintiffs must be able to demonstrate how the device malfunctioned and caused their injuries.


Once the science and medicine have been established, the legal aspects of the case come into play. The plaintiffs must prove that the defendant was responsible for their injuries and that they are entitled to compensation. This requires a deep understanding of the legal principles involved, as well as the procedural requirements of the court.


One of the most challenging aspects of mass tort cases is managing the large number of plaintiffs involved. These cases can involve hundreds or even thousands of individuals, each with their own unique circumstances and injuries. Managing the logistics of such a case requires a team of skilled attorneys and support staff who are experienced in handling complex litigation. 


However, despite the challenges, they have the potential to provide justice for a large number of people who have been harmed by a common product or action. By pooling their resources and expertise, the plaintiffs can take on powerful defendants and hold them accountable for the harm they have caused.


Mass tort cases are complex, challenging, and require a deep intersection of science, medicine, and law. However, they also have the potential to provide justice for a large number of people who have been harmed by a common product or action. By understanding how these cases work and the various components involved, we can appreciate the immense effort required to seek justice in these cases. If you have questions about filing a mass tort lawsuit, contact our experienced attorneys today.

Contact Us

By submitting this form you agree to receive text messages.

A retracted study on Roundup reignites debate over its potential cancer risk (Washington Post)

By Rebecca Rivera • December 9, 2025
As reported in the Washington Post December 5th, 2025 by Amudalat Ajasa A prominent scientific journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, has retracted a widely cited 2000 study that previously concluded the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, posed no cancer risk to humans. The retraction was initiated after evidence emerged suggesting the study was heavily influenced by the herbicide's seller, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), in an apparent effort to disguise potential health risks. Specific concerns cited by the journal include the strong possibility that Monsanto employees contributed to the writing without proper acknowledgment, that the authors may have received undisclosed payments from the company , and that the findings were based solely on unpublished Monsanto studies. This misconduct, discovered through internal company emails during federal litigation, is significant because the faulty research served as a bedrock for regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate for decades. Summary of Alleged Faulty Study and Monsanto's Influence The Study and Its Conclusion: The retracted paper, published in 2000, was a "bedrock study" that concluded: "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans." The Retraction: The scientific journal retracted the study due to a loss of confidence in its results and conclusions, citing the need to "maintain the integrity of the journal." Evidence of Undisclosed Influence: The co-editor in chief cited evidence suggesting that Monsanto employees "may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co authors." Undisclosed Payments: The retraction also noted that the study's authors may have been paid by Monsanto without disclosing it . Basis of Findings: The journal stated that the study's findings about cancer risk were "solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto." Discovery of Influence: Monsanto's influence over the study was reportedly discovered through internal emails released during federal litigation against the company in 2017. Impact: The study "had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," and was one of the most-cited papers on glyphosate safety, underpinning federal regulations for the pesticide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) even cited it in its 2016 review of glyphosate. Context and Aftermath Bayer's Defense: Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) defended the chemical's safety and argued that Monsanto's involvement was appropriately cited in the acknowledgments, stating that glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide and that the "vast majority of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement." Regulatory Stance: The EPA stated the retraction would not affect its current stance —which is that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—because the agency does not directly rely on review articles like this one, but uses them to find other relevant individual studies. Litigation: Bayer has spent approximately $10 billion to settle lawsuits arguing the company did not warn customers about the negative health impacts of using Roundup. Read the full article in the Washington Post

BSA Bankruptcy Update with Curtis Garrison and Jason J Joy

By Rebecca Rivera • November 14, 2025
In this series premiere episode, Founder & President of SOSCSA, Child Sexual Abuse Survivor & BSA Bankruptcy Claimant, Curtis Garrison interviews attorney Jason J Joy for an update on the BSA bankruptcy and discussing childhood abuse litigation for which Jason is an outspoken and experienced advocate. Jason's firm is actively litigating cases for many clients his law firm represents. This podcast is recommended for clients already represented, and for those who are still contemplating coming forward to establish a claim. Topics covered in this episode: Recent BSA Bankruptcy Trust report Lajun Claimants (Guam) v. Boy Scouts of America and their recent Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court The 1.5% initial payment, possible second payment time / total percentage Future Claims, BSA Councils, BSA Charters (churches, schools, etc) which there are over 100,000 entities possibly getting free of liability Mixed Claims explained We did not vote for this plan, they promised we would be paid in “Paid in Full” Plans to file an Amicus Brief Statute of Limitations 

Boy Scouts Abuse Case Update | Curtis Garrison & Jason Joy

By Rebecca Rivera • November 6, 2025
The Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy case, involving tens of thousands of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, is among the largest and most contentious mass tort proceedings in U.S. history. In this podcast, Attorney Jason Joy breaks down the latest ruling from the Third Circuit Court, which leaves many survivors of childhood sexual abuse with drastically underfunded compensation.