At Mass Tort Strategies (MTS), our mission is clear: to simplify the claimant acquisition process while delivering high-quality, signed retainers to our law firm partners. We understand the challenges attorneys face with traditional lead generation, which often results in unqualified leads and wasted resources. That’s why we’ve developed a streamlined, compliance-driven process designed to maximize efficiency and results for your practice.
In this post, we’ll take you behind the scenes of the MTS process and show how we’re helping law firms serve more clients with confidence.
Why Choose MTS?
MTS was founded to address a critical gap in the legal intake industry: the need for retained clients rather than just leads. With years of experience in mass torts and legal intake, we’ve built a system that prioritizes:
• Quality: Delivering fully vetted, responsive cases.
• Efficiency: Streamlining processes to save you time.
• Transparency: Providing clear, reliable communication every step of the way.
Our approach ensures that every case meets your tailored criteria, empowering you to focus on litigation while we handle the details.
How the MTS Process Works
1. Identifying Opportunities
Every mass tort campaign starts with extensive research. Our team identifies emerging torts in their early stages, analyzing trends and data to determine their potential impact.
We then collaborate with law firms to understand their goals and customize criteria that align with their specific needs. Whether it’s a high-profile tort like Camp Lejeune or an emerging litigation like Depo Provera, our process ensures cases are built to drive results.
2. Launching Campaigns
Once a mass tort opportunity is identified, our marketing experts get to work. We design targeted campaigns using multi-channel strategies.
Our campaigns are data-driven and frequently updated to ensure maximum effectiveness as new legal developments arise.
3. Screening and Qualification
Potential claimants are directed to our legal intake center in Southern California. Here’s what happens next:
• Thorough Screening: Our highly trained intake specialists conduct in-depth screenings using criteria customized to meet each law firm’s specific needs. These criteria are developed in close collaboration with litigators to ensure alignment with case requirements.
• Retention Focus: Qualified claimants are guided through the process to sign a retainer agreement.
• Tailored Delivery: Retainer agreements and supporting documentation are delivered through the law firm’s preferred method, whether by email, API, or Dropbox, ensuring a seamless handoff tailored to your workflow.
4. Maintaining Quality Assurance
Our commitment to quality doesn’t end once cases are delivered. If a case is found to be flawed or incomplete, we promptly replace it—no questions asked. This ensures that every case you receive meets your expectations.
The MTS Difference
What sets MTS apart is our focus on building meaningful connections between claimants, law firms, and referral partners. By streamlining the intake process, we help attorneys:
• Save Time: Spend less time on administrative tasks and more on litigation.
• Grow Dockets: Build a strong pipeline of qualified cases.
• Deliver Justice: Serve more clients with confidence and care.
As we reflect on 2024, we’re proud to celebrate an incredible year of growth, impact, and success at Mass Tort Strategies (MTS). Thanks to the dedication of our skilled intake team and strong partnerships with law firms, we’ve achieved remarkable milestones in delivering high-quality, responsive cases to our partners.
Here’s what we accomplished in 2024:
• Camp Lejeune: 2,636 Cases Accepted
• Talcum Powder: 4 Cases Accepted
• Roundup: 1,886 Cases Accepted
• Oxbryta: 11 Cases Accepted
• Depo Provera: 549 Cases Accepted
• Hair Relaxer: 389 Cases Accepted
• NEC: 414 Cases Accepted
Behind the Numbers: Commitment to Quality Intake
Every accepted case reflects the meticulous effort of our trained intake professionals. By identifying qualified candidates who meet tailored criteria set by our partners, we ensure that each case delivers real value. Whether it’s a high-profile mass tort like Camp Lejeune or emerging litigation like Oxbryta, our team consistently delivers:
• Strong and Qualified Cases: Our intake process is designed to meet rigorous standards, aligning with the unique needs of each partner.
• Responsiveness: We focus on clear communication, ensuring claimants feel supported while delivering timely results to our partners.
• Compliance and Accuracy: We adhere to strict quality control measures, safeguarding the integrity of every case.
Why Our Intake Process Stands Out
At MTS, we believe in doing intake the right way. Our process is powered by:
• Trained and Experienced Agents: Equipped to handle the nuances of mass tort intake with professionalism and empathy.
• Tailored Criteria: Customized screening processes that align with our partners’ goals, ensuring the highest acceptance rates.
• Cutting-Edge Technology: Streamlined systems that enhance efficiency and accuracy, from first contact to case acceptance.
Let’s Collaborate in 2025!
As we head into another promising year, we’re excited to continue driving results for our partners. Whether you’re curious about our intake process or looking for ways to improve your own, we’d love to connect!
Mass torts represent a strategic opportunity for law firms to expand their practice and achieve significant revenue growth. However, these complex cases require careful evaluation to ensure a successful outcome. At MTS, we specialize in helping firms navigate the intricacies of mass tort litigation, from intake to settlement. Below, we break down seven critical factors every firm should assess before diving into a mass tort.
1. Understand the Life Cycle of the Tort
Mass tort cases progress through distinct stages, each presenting unique challenges and opportunities. Identifying where the tort stands in its life cycle is crucial:
• Early Stage: Risks are highest, as strategies are still being formed and the scope of the case remains uncertain. However, acquisition costs are lower, and early entry can lead to significant returns if the case is successful.
• Mid-Stage: With an MDL established and litigation strategies solidified, risks decrease but acquisition costs rise. This stage offers a balanced entry point for firms.
• Late Stage: As cases near settlement, risks are minimized, but acquisition costs reach their peak. This stage is ideal for firms seeking lower risk and quicker resolution, albeit at a higher cost.
2. Assess the Risks
Mass torts demand substantial resources and financial investment. Before committing, firms should carefully evaluate their tolerance for risk and budget accordingly. Strategic planning and sound financial management are key to navigating these high-stakes cases successfully.
3. Evaluate the Injuries
The nature and extent of the harm suffered by claimants play a critical role in determining the viability of a mass tort. Understanding the impact on claimants’ lives helps establish the potential damages and strengthens the case for litigation. Ensure you have a clear picture of the causation and severity of injuries before proceeding.
4. Consider the Volume of Claimants
The success of a mass tort is often tied to the number of claimants involved. A high claimant volume can amplify public awareness and pressure defendants to settle. Additionally, larger groups of plaintiffs reduce the likelihood of prolonged litigation, as defendants may prioritize cost-effective resolutions.
5. Monitor Case Attrition
Case attrition—when cases drop out or are dismissed—can undermine the viability of a mass tort. High attrition rates are often caused by misaligned or overly broad intake criteria. To minimize attrition, establish stringent, up-to-date criteria tailored to the specific tort. At MTS, we work with top litigators to ensure only viable cases move forward, reducing attrition and enhancing outcomes.
6. Align With Reputable Litigating Firms
Collaborating with experienced firms that have a track record of success in mass torts can provide a significant advantage. These firms bring valuable insights, refined strategies, and a deep understanding of the nuances involved in mass tort litigation. Their expertise also ensures compliance with legal and regulatory standards, from advertising to intake.
7. Evaluate the Evidence
Sufficient evidence is the backbone of any mass tort. If your firm is handling litigation, ensure you have the infrastructure to manage and organize large volumes of evidence effectively. Retaining credible expert witnesses—such as medical professionals, scientists, or industry specialists—is also crucial for building a strong case.
Connect with MTS at the National Trial Lawyers Summit in Miami
The Mass Tort Strategies (MTS) management team is excited to announce our participation in the upcoming National Trial Lawyers (NTL) Summit, scheduled for January 26-30, 2025, at the prestigious Loews Miami Beach Hotel in Miami, Florida.
About the NTL Summit
The NTL Summit is a premier event that brings together the nation’s leading civil plaintiff and criminal defense attorneys. Designed to enhance trial and business management skills, the summit offers a variety of networking opportunities and informative sessions, providing attendees with actionable steps to strengthen their practice and improve courtroom tactics.
Why Meet with MTS?
At MTS, we specialize in providing comprehensive mass tort intake services that enable law firms to focus on litigation while we manage the complexities of client intake. Meeting with our management team at the summit offers an opportunity to:
• Learn About Our Services: Discover how our tailored intake solutions can streamline your firm’s operations.
• Discuss Collaboration Opportunities: Explore potential partnerships to enhance client acquisition and case management.
• Network with Industry Leaders: Engage in meaningful conversations with professionals dedicated to excellence in the legal field.
Reach out today to book a meeting!
Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a severe gastrointestinal condition predominantly affecting premature infants. Recent legal actions have targeted manufacturers of cow’s milk-based infant formulas, alleging a link between these products and an increased risk of NEC in preterm babies. As of December 2024, significant developments have emerged in this mass tort litigation, impacting both affected families and the infant formula industry.
Background on NEC and Infant Formula
NEC involves inflammation leading to the death of intestinal tissue, posing serious health risks to infants. Studies have suggested that preterm infants fed cow’s milk-based formulas, such as Similac and Enfamil, may have a higher risk of developing NEC compared to those fed human milk. This association has led to numerous lawsuits against formula manufacturers Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil), accusing them of failing to warn consumers about potential risks.
Recent Legal Developments
• Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Growth: The NEC infant formula MDL has seen consistent growth, with 26 new cases added in November 2024, bringing the total to 626 pending cases. This consolidation aims to streamline pretrial proceedings for cases sharing common factual issues.
• Significant Jury Verdicts: In July 2024, a Missouri jury awarded $495 million in damages against Abbott Laboratories, finding that their specialized infant formula caused an Illinois girl to develop NEC. The verdict included $95 million in compensatory damages and $400 million in punitive damages.
• Defense Verdicts: Conversely, in October 2024, a Missouri court ruled in favor of Abbott and Reckitt Benckiser, rejecting claims that their formulas caused a child to develop NEC. This outcome highlights the complexities and varying results in ongoing litigation.
Implications for Affected Families
Families with infants diagnosed with NEC after consuming cow’s milk-based formulas may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other related damages. Legal experts suggest that recent verdicts could influence settlement amounts in ongoing and future cases.
Legal Considerations for Potential Claimants
• Statute of Limitations: The timeframe to file a lawsuit varies by jurisdiction. It’s crucial to consult with an attorney promptly to ensure compliance with relevant deadlines.
• Documentation: Maintaining comprehensive medical records, including documentation of formula usage and any adverse effects experienced, is essential to support legal claims.
• Legal Representation: Engaging with a law firm experienced in product liability and mass tort litigation can provide valuable guidance and increase the likelihood of a favorable outcome.
Conclusion
The ongoing NEC mass tort litigation underscores the critical importance of product safety and transparency in the infant formula industry. As legal proceedings continue, affected families are encouraged to seek legal counsel to explore their options for compensation and to hold manufacturers accountable for alleged negligence.
Oxbryta (voxelotor), a medication developed to treat sickle cell disease (SCD), has recently become the focus of significant legal action following its global recall in September 2024. Manufactured by Pfizer, Oxbryta was initially hailed as a breakthrough treatment for SCD, a genetic disorder characterized by abnormal hemoglobin that leads to distorted, sickle-shaped red blood cells. However, emerging safety concerns have led to a wave of lawsuits alleging severe side effects and inadequate warnings provided to patients and healthcare providers.
Background on Oxbryta
Approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2019 under its Accelerated Approval Program, Oxbryta was designed to inhibit hemoglobin polymerization, thereby reducing the formation of sickle-shaped cells and improving oxygen delivery. Despite its promising mechanism of action, post-marketing studies and adverse event reports have raised serious safety concerns.
Recent Developments in Oxbryta Litigation
As of December 2024, several key developments have unfolded in the ongoing Oxbryta litigation:
• Voluntary Market Withdrawal: On September 25, 2024, Pfizer announced a global recall of Oxbryta, citing that “the overall benefit of Oxbryta no longer outweighs the risk in the approved sickle cell patient population.” This decision was influenced by data indicating an increased risk of severe adverse events, including vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs), stroke, organ failure, and death among patients using the medication.
• Emergence of Lawsuits: Following the recall, numerous lawsuits have been filed against Pfizer and its subsidiary, Global Blood Therapeutics. Plaintiffs allege that the companies failed to adequately warn about the potential risks associated with Oxbryta, leading to severe health complications. For instance, an Illinois man filed a lawsuit in November 2024 after experiencing serious injuries attributed to Oxbryta.
• Regulatory Actions: The European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended suspending the marketing authorization for Oxbryta as a precaution while a review of emerging data is ongoing. This aligns with Pfizer’s decision to withdraw the drug from the market, reflecting global concerns about its safety profile.
Implications for Affected Patients
Patients who have experienced adverse effects after using Oxbryta may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost wages, and other related damages. Legal experts suggest that settlement amounts could be substantial, especially in cases involving severe injuries or fatalities. Factors influencing settlement amounts include the severity of the injury, the impact on the patient’s quality of life, and the degree of negligence attributed to the manufacturer.
Legal Considerations for Potential Claimants
Individuals considering legal action should be aware of the following:
• Statute of Limitations: The timeframe to file a lawsuit varies by jurisdiction. It’s crucial to consult with an attorney promptly to ensure compliance with relevant deadlines.
• Documentation: Maintaining comprehensive medical records, including documentation of Oxbryta usage and any adverse effects experienced, is essential to support legal claims.
• Legal Representation: Engaging with a law firm experienced in pharmaceutical litigation can provide valuable guidance and increase the likelihood of a favorable outcome.
Conclusion
The unfolding Oxbryta litigation underscores the critical importance of drug safety and the responsibility of pharmaceutical companies to provide transparent and comprehensive information about potential risks. As legal proceedings continue, affected individuals are encouraged to seek legal counsel to explore their options for compensation and to hold manufacturers accountable for alleged negligence.
The legal marketing landscape is about to transform significantly. On January 27, 2025, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will enforce the One-to-One Consent Rule under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). This groundbreaking regulation introduces strict guidelines on how businesses, including law firms, communicate with potential clients. For law firms relying on lead generation, understanding and adhering to these new standards is crucial to protect your business and reputation.
What is the FCC’s One-to-One Consent Rule?
The One-to-One Consent Rule requires businesses to obtain explicit, prior consent before sending automated communications, such as text messages or robocalls. This new rule directly impacts law firms using third-party lead generation services.
If your law firm depends on non-branded advertisements, co-registration marketing, or blanket consent practices, you’re at risk. The rule mandates that prospects explicitly agree to be contacted by your firm, named specifically, for designated services.
Why Non-Compliance Puts Your Law Firm at Risk
Failing to comply with the FCC’s One-to-One Consent Rule can have serious consequences for law firms:
Financial Penalties: Fines range from $500 to $1,500 per violation. For firms managing a high volume of leads, non-compliance could result in overwhelming costs.
Legal Risks: Using blanket consent methods that don’t name your firm may lead to lawsuits and operational challenges.
Reputation Damage: Violations erode trust with potential clients. Unsolicited communications can harm your firm’s credibility and turn leads into liabilities.
How Law Firms Can Stay Compliant
To safeguard your law firm from penalties and reputational harm, strategic adjustments to your lead generation practices are necessary. Follow these steps to ensure compliance with the new FCC regulations:
Require Firm-Specific Consent
Work with lead providers to ensure they collect explicit consent that names your law firm and specifies the services offered. If your current providers rely on blanket consent methods, it’s time to reevaluate those relationships.
Maintain Comprehensive Records
Document every instance of consent, including the time, date, and method of collection. Ensure compliance with the E-Sign Act, and securely store records for at least five years. Missing or incomplete documentation can expose your firm to regulatory risks.
Vet Your Vendors
Not all lead generation companies are equipped to meet the FCC’s stringent compliance standards. Partner with vendors that have the technical expertise and processes in place to align with these new requirements.
Train Your Team
Educate your intake and marketing teams about the FCC’s One-to-One Consent Rule. Comprehensive training ensures everyone in your organization understands the new standards and avoids costly mistakes.
Why Compliance Is Key to Building Trust and Credibility
Compliance with the FCC’s new rule is about more than avoiding fines. It demonstrates your firm’s commitment to transparency, respect for client privacy, and ethical communication practices. By prioritizing compliance, your law firm can strengthen its reputation, build trust with potential clients, and foster long-term relationships.
Action Plan to Prepare Your Law Firm
With the January 27, 2025 deadline fast approaching, law firms must act immediately to prepare for the FCC’s regulatory changes. Here’s how you can ensure compliance:
Taking these proactive steps will protect your firm from financial penalties and reputational harm while positioning you as a trusted, ethical advocate for your clients.
MTS is Here to Help
The FCC’s One-to-One Consent Rule marks a critical shift in legal marketing. By understanding and adapting to this new regulation, your firm can protect its reputation, build client trust, and demonstrate your commitment to ethical practices.
If you’re unsure how these changes will affect your firm or need help updating your marketing strategies, MTS is here to assist. With deep expertise in legal intake and lead generation, MTS can guide your firm through this transition, ensuring compliance while maximizing your lead generation efforts.
Contact MTS today to secure your firm’s future in an evolving legal marketing landscape.
Depo-Provera, a widely used injectable contraceptive, has recently come under legal scrutiny due to allegations linking its prolonged use to the development of intracranial meningiomas—benign brain tumors arising from the meninges, the protective layers surrounding the brain and spinal cord. As of December 2024, numerous lawsuits have been filed against Pfizer, the manufacturer of Depo-Provera, alleging failure to adequately warn users about these potential risks.
Background on Depo-Provera
Depo-Provera contains medroxyprogesterone acetate, a synthetic progestin administered via injection every three months to prevent pregnancy. Its convenience and effectiveness have made it a popular choice among women seeking long-term contraception. However, emerging studies have suggested a significant association between extended use of Depo-Provera and an increased risk of developing meningiomas.
Recent Legal Developments
• New Lawsuit in Louisiana: A woman filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Louisiana, alleging that Depo-Provera caused her to develop an intracranial meningioma. She began receiving the injections at age 18 and claims she was never warned of the risk, despite existing evidence in medical literature and updated warnings in Europe and Canada. The lawsuit accuses Pfizer of failing to provide adequate warnings to U.S. patients or promote safer alternatives, such as a lower-dose version of the drug.
• Motion for Multidistrict Litigation (MDL): The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) is scheduled to hold oral arguments on January 30, 2025, in Miami, Florida, to consider consolidating similar cases into an MDL. This consolidation aims to streamline pretrial proceedings for cases sharing common factual issues, potentially leading to more efficient resolutions.
• Additional Lawsuits in California and Pennsylvania: New lawsuits have been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California and the Court of Common Pleas for Philadelphia County. These cases involve plaintiffs alleging that prolonged use of Depo-Provera led to the development of debilitating meningiomas, with claims focusing on the manufacturers’ failure to provide adequate warnings about the risks associated with the drug’s active ingredient.
Scientific Evidence and Causation
Research indicates that the high levels of synthetic progestin in Depo-Provera may stimulate hormone receptors in meningiomas, promoting tumor growth. A dose-response relationship has been observed, suggesting that the risk of developing meningiomas increases with the number of Depo-Provera injections received. This evidence has become a cornerstone in the ongoing litigation, as plaintiffs argue that Pfizer should have been aware of these risks and taken appropriate action to warn users.
Implications for Affected Individuals
Women who have used Depo-Provera and subsequently developed meningiomas may be entitled to seek compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other related damages. The potential consolidation of cases into an MDL could facilitate more efficient handling of claims, but each case will still require individual assessment based on specific circumstances.
Legal Considerations
Individuals considering legal action should be aware of the following:
• Statute of Limitations: Time limits for filing a lawsuit vary by state. It’s crucial to consult with an attorney promptly to ensure your claim is filed within the applicable period.
• Evidence Documentation: Maintaining thorough medical records and documentation of Depo-Provera use is essential to support your claim.
• Legal Representation: Engaging with a law firm experienced in pharmaceutical litigation can provide guidance tailored to your situation and enhance the likelihood of a favorable outcome.
Conclusion
The ongoing Depo-Provera litigation underscores the importance of pharmaceutical companies providing transparent and comprehensive information about potential risks associated with their products. As legal proceedings continue to evolve, affected individuals are encouraged to seek legal counsel to explore their options for compensation and justice.
Expanding into mass tort litigation offers law firms significant revenue opportunities. However, achieving success in this complex field requires more than legal expertise; it demands strategic marketing acumen and resources. Partnering with a specialized mass tort marketing firm can provide the necessary support, but selecting the right partner is crucial. Here are seven essential questions to guide your decision-making process:
1. Are They Transparent in Their Operations?
Transparency is vital when choosing a marketing partner. Ensure the firm is open about how your marketing budget will be allocated and the specific results you can expect. A reputable partner should provide detailed insights into their advertising strategies, intake processes, and claimant acquisition methods. Request case studies or references from previous campaigns to assess their track record.
2. Do They Employ a Co-Counsel Business Model?
A co-counsel business model aligns the interests of all parties involved, fostering collaboration between your firm and litigating partners. This approach can reduce operational costs and administrative burdens, allowing you to focus on litigation. Inquire whether the marketing company utilizes this model to enhance success rates and optimize your marketing investment.
3. Do They Have an In-House Call Center with Rigorous Pre-Qualification Processes?
An in-house call center staffed with trained professionals ensures potential claimants receive timely and accurate assistance. Robust pre-qualification screening helps deliver only qualified leads, enhancing efficiency. Verify that the partner complies with relevant marketing regulations, such as the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), to avoid legal pitfalls.
4. How Comprehensive Are Their Campaign Tracking and Analytics?
Effective campaign tracking and detailed analytics are crucial for assessing the success of marketing efforts. Ensure the marketing partner can monitor potential claimants from initial contact to signed retainer and adapt strategies based on data-driven insights. This capability allows for efficient resource allocation and maximizes client acquisition.
5. Do They Focus on Delivering Qualified, Signed Retainers?
The ultimate goal is to acquire clients ready for representation. A reliable marketing partner should deliver pre-qualified claimants with signed retainers, reducing your workload and enabling immediate legal action. Inquire about their processes for obtaining and delivering signed retainers to ensure alignment with your firm’s objectives.
6. Do They Have Strong Connections with Top Litigating Firms?
Access to a network of top litigating firms is advantageous in mass tort cases. A marketing partner with established connections can facilitate collaborations, expanding your firm’s capabilities and potential revenue streams. Assess their professional network to determine how it can benefit your practice.
7. What Is Their Experience in Mass Tort Marketing?
Experience in the mass tort arena is invaluable. An experienced marketing partner will have a deep understanding of the nuances involved in mass tort cases, including compliance with legal standards and effective claimant acquisition strategies. Inquire about their history and success in mass tort marketing to gauge their expertise.
Conclusion
Selecting the right mass tort marketing partner is a critical decision that can significantly impact your firm’s success in this practice area. By asking these essential questions, you can ensure that your marketing investment is well-placed, leading to a steady flow of qualified claimants and allowing your firm to focus on delivering justice for your clients.
