|
The presiding judge of the superior court has the authority to designate a case "complex" and should be assigned to the Complex Civil Litigation Court. The presiding judge delegates that authority to the presiding judge of the civil department. However, not all complex cases are torts and not all tort cases are designated complex.
Top
None for "mass tort," but Rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court defines a "complex case" as "an action that requires exceptional judicial management to avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the court or the litigants and to expedite the case, keep costs reasonable, and promote effective decision making by the court, the parties, and counsel."
Factors to be weighed by the court include whether the action is likely to involve numerous pretrial motions raising difficult or novel legal issues that will be time-consuming to resolve; management of a large number of witnesses or a substantial amount of documentary evidence; management of a large number of separately represented parties; coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court; or substantial postjudgment judicial supervision. R. 3.400(b)
Actions provisionally considered "complex" are those involving one or more of the following claims: antitrust or trade regulation; construction defect claims involving many parties or structures; securities claims or investment losses involving many parties; environmental or toxic tort claims involving many parties; mass torts; class actions; or insurance coverage claims arising out of any of these types of claims. R. 3.400(c)(1) through (c)(7)
Top
Cases involving claims for relief based upon exposure to asbestos are designated to the Civil I calendar. Other cases may be designated to the Civil I calendar upon motion of any party, subject to approval, or sua sponte. Factors to be considered for such designation of non-asbestos cases include estimated length of trial; number of witnesses; number of exhibits; nature of the factual and legal issues; extent to which discovery may require court supervision; number of motions that may be filed; other relevant factors.
Top
Mass torts listed on the civil cover sheet: Asbestos Chemical spill Dioxin Hand/arm vibration Hearing loss Radioactive materials Other
Top
There is not a specific definition, although in the Uniform Rules for the Trial Courts, Section 202.69(b)3, “Standards for Coordination,” provides insight into the types of cases that receive coordinated treatment by Mass Tort Litigation Coordinating Panel.
Top
There is no statistical definition of mass tort. Rather, decisions to classify cases as such are based on the number of filings and number of cases expected to be filed over a certain period of time.
Top
None. In Rhode Island claims for what might be considered a “mass tort” (including toxic torts & other permutations) are subject to regular tort principles of negligence.
Top
None, but see tracking, which lists categories included on the civil cover sheet.
Top
There is no definition of "mass tort" in use. Rather, a list of matters that are deemed to be considered mass torts is provided in the annual Mass Tort Survey.
Top
No definition. Since Texas does not track mass tort cases, there is no definition of the term “mass tort” for court statistical purposes.
Top
two (2) or more civil actions pending in one or more circuit courts: (a) involving common questions of law or fact in mass accidents or single catastrophic events in which a number of people are injured; or (b) involving common questions of law or fact in "personal injury mass torts" allegedly incurred upon numerous claimants in connections with widely available or mass-marketed products and their manufacture, design, use, implantation, ingestion, or exposure; or (c) involving common questions o flaw or fact in "property damage mass torts" allegedly incurred upon numerous claimants in connection with claims for replacement or repair of allegedly defective products, including those in which claimants seek compensation for the failure of the product to perform as intended with resulting damage to the product itself or other property, with or without personal injury overtones; or (d) involving common questions of law or fact in "economic loss" cases incurred by numerous claimants asserting defect claims similar to those in property damage circumstances which are in the nature of consumer fraud or warranty actions on a grand scale including allegations of the existence of a defect without actual product failure or injury.
Top
|
