California Ranks 48th in Chamber's List of States' Lawsuit Climate
In a report released Tuesday by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform, California fell from No. 47, its position since 2012. It was the lowest ranking for the Golden State since the Chamber began issuing its report in 2002.
September 17, 2019 at 06:00 PM
4 minute read
California ranked among the worst states for businesses to face lawsuits, earning the state its lowest spot on the list in the past 17 years, according to a report of corporate representatives that was released Tuesday.
The report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform, called "The 2019 Lawsuit Climate Survey: Ranking the States," listed California as No. 48 of all U.S. states based on its overall litigation climate. This year's survey ranked Illinois at No. 50 and Louisiana at No. 49, but California fell from No. 47, its position since 2012. The rank is California's lowest since the chamber began issuing its report every two or three years in 2002.
"California has created a lucrative lawsuit industry where plaintiffs' lawyers prey on hard-working entrepreneurs and small business owners to extort millions of dollars," said Harold Kim, chief operating officer of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, in a press release published with the report. "And when the California Consumer Privacy Act goes into effect in 2020, it will usher in an even bigger flood of lawsuits," he added, referring to a bill that would impose new privacy regulations in the Golden State.
The report used data from interviews conducted by The Harris Poll of more than 1,300 in-house general counsel, attorneys or executives at public and private companies with annual revenue of at least $100 million.
Eric Bailey, a spokesperson for the Consumer Attorneys of California, said the report's source was "far from an objective measurement."
"We have the world's fifth largest economy, and we enjoy that exceptional level of commerce in no small part because our civil justice system helps protect the environment, public safety, our civil liberties, the rights of consumers and workers," he said of California. "I find it absurdly ironic that the U.S. Chamber continues this annual attack on California when in fact the fastest growing category of tort litigation in our state is business versus business. Corporate executives have no problem using the civil justice system when it suits their own purposes—they just don't like to be held accountable when they've done their customers wrong."
The press release with the report noted that California's Proposition 65, which allows private litigants to sue over carcinogens, had become a "cash cow for plaintiffs' lawyers." In 2018, for example, companies settled almost 1,000 lawsuits over Proposition 65 for $35.2 million, $27.3 million of which went to attorney fees and costs.
The release also mentioned "abusive litigation" involving the Americans with Disabilities Act, adding that there was a 54% increase in ADA lawsuits in California from 2017 to 2018 and that 42% of the nation's ADA lawsuits were in California's federal court last year. Other highlights were public nuisance lawsuits brought by California cities and counties, and "eye-popping jury verdicts," such as the $2 billion Roundup verdict against Monsanto Co., now owned by Bayer.
The report found that specific jurisdictions within a state could influence its ranking. In California, for instance, Los Angeles ranked No. 2 among the cities and counties with the "least fair and reasonable litigation environment," while San Francisco ranked No. 3, up from No. 5 in 2017, according to the chamber.
The report ranked each state based on several factors, including treatment of certain types of lawsuits, damages, scientific evidence, the impartiality of judges, and the fairness of juries. California ranked worst of all states in its treatment of class actions and mass litigation, damages and juries' fairness.
The only category in which California did not rank among the bottom five states was in scientific and technical evidence, where it landed at No. 44. In its release, the Chamber noted that California had not adopted the scientific standards for trials used by federal courts and 40 other states, instead allowing "junk science" into the courtroom.
But Brent Wisner, a partner at Los Angeles-based Baum Hedlund who got the $2 billion Roundup verdict, disagreed.
"The idea that California courts allow for the admission of junk science is demonstrably untrue," he wrote in an email. "We see similar admission of expert testimony in state and federal courts, involving the same experts and issues. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce deeply misunderstands the purpose of our tort system. It is not designed to punish honest companies—it is designed to ensure that honest companies are not disadvantaged by following the law. California has been the leader in protecting consumers for decades."
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
© 2025 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 AllState Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
3 minute readApple Disputes 'Efforts to Manufacture' Imaging Sensor Claims Against iPhone 15 Technology
Lawsuit alleges racial and gender discrimination led to an Air Force contractor's death at California airfield
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1MoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
- 2Antitrust in Trump 2.0: Expect Gap Filling from State Attorneys General
- 3People in the News—Jan. 22, 2025—Knox McLaughlin, Saxton & Stump
- 4How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be Open to Opportunities, Ready to Seize Them When They Arise,' Says Lara Shortz of Michelman & Robinson
- 5The Intersection of Labor Law and Politics Following the Presidential Election
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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