united-states class-action
Why rush to class action lawsuits against acetaminophen when the case looks difficult to win?
<p>There are currently a number of places recruiting for a class action lawsuit against Tylenol, and other medicines that use acetaminophen, due to the supposed risk of mother's use of it during pregnancy having children being born with autism.  These law firms apparently expect some real profit from this since they're willing to pay for advertisement on social media just to recruit more people for their lawsuit.</p>
<p>From what I can tell this is all based off of a Consensus statement that basically says &quot;we don't know for sure the potential side effects, we should be cautious with its use just to be safe&quot;.  It's not proving a casual link to anything, much less autism.  It's pretty much just restating what most physicians have already considered wise advice, you're taking a drug we don't fully know how it works and which can be OD on so be careful.  Even if there was a casual risk, I doubt we have proof that the manufacturers of the medications knew about such a, still unproven, link or were negligent in their actions.  Ie from my, admittedly limited outsider view, it seems there is very little basis for expecting to win a lawsuit against these manufactures.</p>
<p>So I'm wondering why these law firms are all so gung-ho to pursue legal action that would be, at best, a very difficult case to win?  Are they simply hoping for a settlement to shut them up without having to take the case to court?  What is the motivation here?</p>

<p>Class action suits can be very costly for defendants, particularly pharmaceutical companies. Therefore, some such companies have been willing to make significant settlements, even when proof of damage and liability were far from clear. Such settlements can result in significant income for the law firms involved.</p>
<p>Thus, some firms are willing to spend significant money to find and sign up potential plaintiffs, either in hope of a settlement, or in hope of an eventual winning case. Either is a gamble, but the potential payoff is large, so such firms (so-called &quot;Mass Tort&quot; firms) may find it worth putting up the money to seek potential plaintiffs. There is no rule requiring any degree of proof or assurance to run such a campaign. If only 1 in 20 such campaigns results in a good settlement, the sponsoring firm may do quite well.</p>
