The rift among plaintiffs lawyers that followed last month’s stunning collapse of the first trial over General Motors Co.’s ignition-switch defect raised serious accusations of backroom deals and lucrative fee arrangements. It also underscores some common concerns about flaws in the multidistrict litigation process.
The lead attorneys in the MDL against GM were forced to withdraw their first bellwether case Jan. 22 amid revelations that their client might have committed fraud and perjury. A few days later, a plaintiffs lawyer, Lance Cooper, who once worked on the MDL’s executive committee, filed court papers claiming the botched trial was doomed from the start, having capped a “long series of poor decisions and mismanagement” by lead attorneys, one of whom might have arranged a “quid pro quo” with GM that maximized his fees.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
