We have reached the top five civil justice stories of 2024. This is Part II of Legal Examiner’s annual compilation of the 10 most important civil cases of 2024, created by Virginia Beach, VA attorney-author Richard N. (Rick) Shapiro and his research assistants, a year-end compilation tradition provided for Legal Examiner since 2012. In Part I, we counted down from 10 through 6; in this second installment, we count down the top five.
Number 5 – Contaminated Water Victims Awarded $3 Billion in Damages
Wren et al. v. Real Water Inc. et al.
Why It Made the List: The plaintiffs in this case involved five children, ranging from 7 months to 5 years old, and three adults. The plaintiffs alleged that in the fall of 2020, after consuming “Real Water,” a brand of alkaline bottled water, they experienced acute liver failure, necessitating emergency medical interventions.
Investigations by health authorities, including the Southern Nevada Health District and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), linked “Real Water” to multiple cases of acute non-viral hepatitis in Nevada. The product was found to contain toxins, notably hydrazine – a chemical used in rocket fuel – resulting from contamination during the manufacturing process.
Following a two-week trial in June, a Nevada jury awarded the plaintiffs $89.75 million in compensatory damages and $3 billion in punitive damages, citing the company’s negligence in ensuring product safety.
This case is among several lawsuits against Real Water Inc., all alleging severe health issues due to the consumption of its bottled water.
Source: Drinking Water Recall Sparks $3 Billion Court Ruling
Number 4 – Jury Awards Victim $2.2 Billion Roundup Verdict
John McKivison vs. Monsanto Company, Bayer and Nouryon Surface Chemistry LLC.
Why It Made the List: This lawsuit is just one in a series of lawsuits against Monsanto, with plaintiffs alleging that exposure to Roundup caused various health issues, including cancer. While Monsanto has secured favorable outcomes in several trials, it continues to face significant legal challenges and financial liabilities related to Roundup litigation.
The plaintiff in this case, a 49-year-old former landscaper from Pennsylvania, alleged that his prolonged use of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. He claimed that during his 20-year career, he regularly applied Roundup professionally and at home, leading to significant exposure to glyphosate, the herbicide’s active ingredient.
A 2015 report by WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer said glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans.” However, Monsanto has continued selling the herbicide, claiming that many studies have concluded that glyphosate is not unsafe.
In January 2024, a Philadelphia jury awarded the plaintiff $2.25 billion in damages, comprising $250 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages. This verdict marked one of the largest awards in litigation concerning Roundup.
Nouryon Chemicals was named as a defendant in the lawsuit due to allegations that it produced a chemical compound that, when combined with glyphosate, enhanced the carcinogenic potential of Roundup. However, during the trial, the judge granted Nouryon’s motion to dismiss, resulting in Monsanto remaining the sole defendant.
Following post-trial motions, the judge reduced the total verdict to $400 million. Bayer AG, Monsanto’s parent company, expressed its intention to appeal the decision, maintaining that the verdict conflicted with scientific evidence and regulatory assessments supporting the safety of glyphosate-based products.
Source: Bayer Jury’s $2.2 Billion Roundup Verdict Is Biggest Yet
Number 3 – $1.1 Billion Settlement for Plaintiffs Injured by Recalled CPAP Machines
In Re: Philips Recalled CPAP, Bi-Level Pap, and Mechanical Ventilator Products Litigation
Why It Made the List: In April 2024, Philips Respironics agreed to a $1.1 billion settlement to address personal injury claims and medical monitoring costs associated with its recalled CPAP, Bi-Level PAP, and mechanical ventilator devices. The products used a foam for sound abatement, but the degraded foam particles could entrain into the airflow, potentially causing airway irritation, and the volatile gas products (diethylene glycol, toluene di-isocyanate isomers, toluene diamine isomers) released during the degradation process may also have cyto- and genotoxic effects.
The settlement allocates $1.075 billion to compensate individuals who suffered injuries, such as respiratory issues and cancer, allegedly linked to the degradation of polyester-based polyurethane (PE-PUR) foam in the devices.
An additional $25 million is designated for medical monitoring of users who may develop future health complications due to exposure to the degraded foam.
This agreement follows a massive recall initiated by Philips in June 2021, affecting 15 million devices worldwide. The recall was prompted by concerns that the PE-PUR foam used for sound abatement could degrade, releasing harmful particles and gases into the device’s airflow, potentially leading to serious health risks for users.
Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported that, since the recall, the agency had received more than 116,000 medical device reports, including 561 reports of deaths.
It’s important to note that this settlement is separate from a previous agreement reached in September 2023, where Philips agreed to pay at least $479 million to resolve economic loss claims related to the recall.
The $1.1 billion settlement specifically addresses personal injury and medical monitoring claims, aiming to provide relief to those directly affected by the health issues associated with the recalled devices.
Source: What consumers should know as Philips agrees to $1.1 billion CPAP settlement
Number 2 – U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Decades-Old Doctrine
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Why It Made the List: This case revolved around a challenge brought by Loper Bright Enterprises, a small family-owned fishing company, against a regulation imposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). This regulation required fishing vessels to carry federal observers onboard to monitor compliance with fisheries management rules and, controversially, mandated that the vessel owners bear the financial burden of funding these observers.
Loper Bright argued that the NMFS overstepped its statutory authority under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act by requiring the industry to fund the monitoring program, a provision not explicitly stated in the law. Lower courts upheld the regulation, relying on Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that directs courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute if it is reasonable.
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Chevron deference in a landmark decision. The Court ruled that interpreting the scope of statutory authority is the judiciary’s responsibility and that ambiguous laws should not automatically grant deference to agencies. The majority opinion concluded that the NMFS lacked the authority to impose the contested funding requirement, siding with Loper Bright Enterprises.
The ramifications of this decision are profound and far-reaching. By overturning Chevron deference, the Supreme Court has shifted the balance of power in administrative law. Courts are now required to independently interpret statutes without automatically deferring to agencies’ interpretations. This change is expected to lead to increased judicial scrutiny of agency regulations and could result in a wave of legal challenges against regulatory actions.
The decision also introduces uncertainty for federal agencies, which may find it more difficult to implement and enforce regulations. This uncertainty could affect industries that rely on clear and predictable regulatory frameworks, such as environmental protection, healthcare, and financial services. In the long term, this decision could reshape the regulatory landscape, potentially curbing the reach of the administrative state while increasing the role of the judiciary in interpreting and shaping federal policy.
The Top Civil Justice Story of 2024
Third Time’s a Charm? J&J Files for Third Bankruptcy in Attempt to Push Talc Powder Cancer Lawsuits Settlement
J&J Talc Powder Lawsuits
Why It Made the List: Our personal injury law firm has reported extensively about the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) legal cases involving claims that the company’s talc-based products, such as baby powder, caused ovarian cancer and other health problems due to contamination with asbestos. Some of the cases have even made prior years’ Top Ten Civil Justice Stories lists.
In May, cancer victims filed a class action against Johnson & Johnson over ‘fraudulent’ bankruptcies. It’s just the latest in a legal battle that has been going on for more than a decade.
Plaintiffs claim that J&J’s talc products contained asbestos, a known carcinogen, leading to ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. The company is accused of failing to inform consumers about the potential risks associated with their talc products. Internal documents allegedly show that J&J had known about potential contamination risks for decades but had not adequately acted to protect consumers.
The company denies wrongdoing and has insisted all along its products are safe. It’s important to note that while J&J continues to assert the safety of its talc products, it has ceased selling talc-based baby powder.
The first lawsuit was filed in 2013, and as of December 2024, more than 62,000 claims have been filed. J&J has faced mixed outcomes in court, with some plaintiffs awarded significant damages (e.g., a 2018 verdict of $4.7 billion awarded to 22 women, later reduced on appeal).
Now, the company is being accused of utilizing a controversial legal strategy referred to as “Texas Two-Step Bankruptcy.” J&J created a subsidiary (initially LTL Management LLC, later Red River Talc LLC) to absorb talc liabilities. This subsidiary then filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to freeze litigation and negotiate a global settlement. The company has proposed multi-billion-dollar settlements, with the most recent being $10 billion to resolve current and future claims.
J&J first filed for bankruptcy in October 2021, but the courts ultimately dismissed the filing. The company filed again just two months later. The court rejected that claim, but the company appealed. The appeals were finally resolved earlier this year, and the second bankruptcy petition was dismissed. This led to the company filing its third petition for bankruptcy in June. The first two bankruptcy petitions were filed in New Jersey, but the third petition was filed in Texas, where the company believes it will obtain a more favorable outcome.
Over the summer, the company proposed a $6.5 billion settlement for all claimants. In September, it announced it was working on a $8 billion settlement package, which it claimed was supported by more than 80 percent of claimants. In December, that figure had jumped to $10 billion.
In February 2025, a hearing will decide whether the company’s proposed $10 billion offer and bankruptcy case can proceed. Whatever the ruling, based on past history, appeals will likely be filed.
In the meantime, as all of this has been playing out, cancer and mesothelioma claims continue to be filed, and lawsuits continue to be heard. And J&J continues to deny liability for each one.
Source: J&J subsidiary files for bankruptcy to advance $8 billion talc settlement
Rick Shapiro has practiced personal injury law for over 30 years in Virginia, North Carolina, and throughout the Southeastern United States. He is a Board-Certified Civil Trial Advocate by the National Board of Trial Advocacy (ABA Accredited) and has litigated injury cases throughout the eastern United States, including wrongful death, trucking, faulty products, railroad, and medical negligence claims. During his three-decade career, Shapiro has won client appeals before the VA Supreme Court, VA Court of Appeals, NC Supreme Court, SC Supreme Court, WV Supreme Court, TN Supreme Court, and three times before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, underscoring Shapiro’s trial achievements. In addition, he and his law firm have won settlements/verdicts in excess of $100 million. His success in and out of the courtroom is a big reason why he was named 2019 “Lawyer of the Year” in railroad law in U.S. News & World Report's Best Lawyers publication (Norfolk, VA area), and he has been named a “Best Lawyer” and “Super Lawyer” by those peer-reviewed organizations for multiple years. Rick was also named a “Leader in the Law, Class of 2022” by Virginia Lawyers Weekly (total of 33 statewide honorees consisting of lawyers and judges across Virginia). And in September 2023, Rick was selected as a recipient of the National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA) 2023 President’s Award. Although many nominations were submitted from across the country, Rick was just one of eight attorneys chosen by the prestigious National Board which certifies civil trial attorneys across the U.S. Rick was also recently named to Virginia Lawyers Weekly 2024 Virginia’s Go To Lawyers Medical Malpractice. The attorneys awarded this honor are nominated by their colleagues and chosen by a panel from the publication.
