3 of the Biggest Product Liability Cases to Watch for in 2023

Liability cases on an individual scale can sometimes have difficulty becoming breaking news, but when a liability case has several thousand filed cases and a large payout, people tend to pay more attention to it. In 2023, there are a few ongoing cases and one or two burgeoning ones that have either already piqued the public’s interest or have a great probability of catching a spot on the headlines.

Case #1: “The Texas Two-Step”

Defendants: 3M and Johnson & Johnson

Having started out in 2021, these liability cases were two completely separate ones. Johnson and Johnson started out defending their iconic talc baby powder products after being accused of asbestos contamination, which reportedly caused mesothelioma or ovarian cancers, while 3M was faced with 200,000 filed cases from former and current military members who claim that defective 3M earplugs caused damage to their hearing.

Quite unrelated, until they both employed an aversion tactic known at the “Texas Two-Step,” which means that instead of facing mass tort charges, the companies attempted to evade the payouts by pushing the claims off to a subsidiary, who filed for bankruptcy.

• A subsidiary is defined by Investopedia as, “A company that belongs to another company, which is usually referred to as the parent company or the holding company; the parent company holds a controlling interest in the subsidiary company, meaning it has or controls more than half of its stock.”

Now, the cases have converged as both have been appealed for the same reason – the legal and ethical question of whether the Texas Two-Step is viable in mass tort cases. The outcome of the combined suit in 2023 against the Texas Two-Step could affect how both of the individual liability cases turn out for the plaintiffs and potentially block companies from using this method to dodge debt-collection liability lawsuits in the future, as well.

Case #2: Guns as a Public Nuisance

Defendants: Gun Manufacturers and Retailers

The war on guns has been waging for years, yet there never seems to be much change. With the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms on top of the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, gun producers are largely held above the reach of the public and those seeking to take them to court. Until now, as it might be.

Having found a loophole, plaintiffs and lawmakers have been percolating a public nuisance complaint, drawing on the stare decisis of companies traditionally being held responsible for the damage and/or clean-up of the environment or affected entities. New York, New Jersey, and Delaware are states that are leading this charge, having already passed laws that allow gun manufacturers and retailers to be sued for creating a public nuisance by refusing to implement sufficient preventative measures or recklessly selling their legal weapons.

2022 has already seen a gunmaker lose a challenge to New York’s law, but remaining on appeal, and in 2023, we’ll watch as it’s determined whether the challenges that manufacturers in New Jersey and Delaware have brought forth in an attempt to block their respective laws will go through.

Either way, this year could prove to be pivotal in how the gun industry will proceed and what America’s response will be to the rising statistics on gun murders that showed a 34% increase from the year before, a 49% increase over five years, and a 75% increase over 10 years, as well as the recent outbreak of deadly school and mass shootings.

Case #3: Contaminated Baby Formula

Defendants: Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson

With the shortage in baby formula, this is one case that no one wants to see on the list. But it’s because of these very kinds of cases that there’s a shortage in the first place – it’s an awful cycle, but a necessary one in order to produce safe formula for infants. These cases deviate in what issues were brought to court.

Abbott formulas were claimed to be contaminated with Cronobacter sakazakii bacteria, which can cause serious illnesses that alter functions, including meningitis. Their run-ins with claims of toxicity root all the way back to 2013, though, and they are no stranger to court. This particular time, however, claims revolve around the February 2022 incident, when a Michigan factory was shut down following a string of infant illnesses. An FDA inspection proceeded to find serious safety problems at the plant, but it was ultimately allowed to reopen in July under an agreement with the overseeing government agency.

The mass tort litigation consolidated in August and included the families of the sick infants as well as parents who bought the formula at a premium price without having been warned of the contamination. With Abbott refuting the claims in December and moving to dismiss them on the grounds that only 15 cases were officially reported and none supported any evidence that the company acted negligently, the motions are still pending in 2023, and might be a case that opens up in the coming year.

Abbott products include:

• Similac Powdered Formula
• Alimentum Powdered Formula
• EleCare Powdered Formulas
• Similac PM 60/40 Liquid Formula

Mead Johnson was accused of selling formula without properly warning parents of the higher risk of their infant developing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), a severe gastrointestinal condition that primarily affects premature and medically fragile infants. Intestinal inflammation can result in serious complications, and although many babies fully recover, NEC can cause lifelong neurological and nutritional complications or death. Parents are claiming that Abbott knew about this (having been warned by major medical groups), but failed to notify them and that their infants have become sick because of it.

Mead Johnson products include:

• Enfamil Human Milk Fortifier Acidified Liquid
• Enfamil Human Milk Fortifier Powder
• Enfacare Powder
• Enfamil Human Milk Fortifier Liquid High Protein
• Enfamil Milk Fortifier Liquid Standard Protein
• Enfamil NeuroPro Enfacare
• Enfamil Premature 20 Cal
• Enfamil Premature 24 Cal
• Enfamil Premature 24 Cal/fl oz HP
• Enfamil Premature 30 Cal
• Enfamil 24 and DHA & ARA Supplement

Bring Your Louisville Product Liability Case to Cooper and Friedman, PLLC

If you or someone you love has been the victim of a liable product in the State of Kentucky and are in need of an experienced product liability attorney, give the lawyers at the Cooper & Friedman law firm a call. The attorneys at Cooper and Friedman PLLC have over 50 years of combined experience defending the rights of product liability victims. Contact us with questions you might have or schedule a free case consultation with an attorney by calling 502-459-7555 today.

**Case data taken from: Reuters News Agency, Forbes Advisor, and lawsuit-information-center.com**