Texas Lawyer Signs on 1,800 Clients Suing JUUL After Learning His Son Vaped
San Antonio mass tort litigator Mikal Watts has become the second attorney to file litigation over JUUL vaping products in a Texas court, but the two cases will likely face transfer to the multidistrict litigation handling 163 similar cases in California.
November 22, 2019 at 05:59 PM
3 minute read
San Antonio litigator MIkal Watts, who's made a name for himself nationwide in mass tort cases, found a vaping device in his son's truck, and he said it turned his focus to suing JUUL Labs Inc.
"He said, 'Dad, everyone is doing it. It's safer than smoking,'" Watts recalled about confronting his son about using JUUL. He said the incident prompted him to research how prevalent vaping had become in middle and high schools, the addictiveness of electronic cigarettes and the health problems they could cause.
Now Watts, partner in Watts Guerra in San Antonio, has become the first Texas attorney to sue e-cigarette maker JUUL Labs Inc. in a Texas court. But Watts, who sued JUUL on Thursday, can't take credit for filing the first such suit in the Lone Star State. That suit came from Wisconsin attorney Erin Dickinson, whose vaping lawsuit landed more than a month ago.
Watts said he's planning to file many more lawsuits, as he's already signed up 1,800 vaping clients. He added that he's friends with other prominent mass tort attorneys in Texas who are also powering up to go after JUUL in court.
In addition to JUUL, the suit Watts filed names Pax Labs Inc., JUUL's parent company until 2017, as a defendant. Plaintiff Joshua Isakoff alleges that the defendants negligently or fraudulently told him that JUUL didn't create a high risk of nicotine addiction in adolescents. The company targeted adolescents in marketing campaigns and through flavored vaping products, said the complaint in Isakoff v. JUUL Labs Inc. Isakoff claims he's suffered from nicotine addiction and personal injuries.
The other Texas JUUL case, Hanzlovic v. JUUL Labs Inc., involves two plaintiffs, Tiana Hanzlovic and Christian Davis, who alleged they started using JUUL when they were under 18 years old because of JUUL's marketing to young people. They claimed the company told youth that its product was totally safe, when it's really more potent than cigarettes, exposing teens to unsafe levels of nicotine. The plaintiffs both became addicted to nicotine, and developed lung problems and other health issues, according to the complaint.
The Hanzlovic case is already in the process of transferring to the multidistrict litigation against JUUL, pending before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. There, more than 160 cases in the MDL focus on the company's marketing, particularly to children, and alleged injuries caused by its products, including addiction, pulmonary disease and seizures.
JUUL faces a mix of personal injury and addiction cases, as well as proposed class actions brought on behalf of consumers, school districts and state and local governments, plus cases seeking medical monitoring for users going forward.
No one from JUUL's press team immediately returned an email seeking comment. A statement on the company's website said that JUUL has taken actions to combat underage use.
"At JUUL Labs, we have no higher priority than combating youth use. As data has emerged about the scope of the youth vaping issue, we have taken a series of escalating steps to combat youth access, appeal and use of vapor products," the statement reads. "Our target market is the one billion adult smokers globally, more than 70% of whom want to quit using combustible cigarettes. Offering these adult smokers a real alternative to cigarettes is a public health and commercial opportunity of historic proportions."
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLennox Hires 12-Year Company Veteran as CLO, Bucking Hire-From-Outside Trend
3 minute read'Strong' Legal Theory or 'Oxymoron'? Experts Eye FTC Antitrust Suit Against Mattress Merger
5 minute readThis Judge Hoped to Be Reversed: Good News for Plaintiffs in Asbestos MDL
4 minute readSenior American Airlines Attorney Lands Back at Kimberly-Clark, This Time as GC
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250