RAND Institute for Civil Justice Report on the Abuse of Medical Diagnostic Practices in Mass Tort Litigation: Lessons Learned from the "Phantom" Silica Epidemic That May Deter Litigation Screening Abuse

By Behrens, Mark A.; Schaecher, Corey | Albany Law Review, Winter 2010 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

RAND Institute for Civil Justice Report on the Abuse of Medical Diagnostic Practices in Mass Tort Litigation: Lessons Learned from the "Phantom" Silica Epidemic That May Deter Litigation Screening Abuse


Behrens, Mark A., Schaecher, Corey, Albany Law Review


In June 2005, United States District Court Judge Janis Graham Jack of the Southern District of Texas issued a landmark opinion declaring that all but one of ten thousand cases aggregated for pretrial purposes under Multidistrict Litigation ("MDL") 1553 were based on "fatally unreliable" diagnoses. (1) Judge Jack found that the claims "were driven by neither health nor justice: they were manufactured for money." (2) The broad media reporting of Judge Jack's findings sparked criminal and congressional inquiries in which the suspect doctors "took the Fifth." (3)

The RAND Institute for Civil Justice recently issued a report that carefully examines the MDL 1553 litigation to identify lessons that can be learned about the civil justice system's ability to detect and address abusive medical diagnostic practices in mass personal injury litigation. (4)

I. SILICA LITIGATION: BACKGROUND AND MDL 1553

A. Knowledge and Regulation

Silica--quartz in its most common form--is a ubiquitous mineral that covers beaches and fills children's sandboxes. (5) In its natural form, silica is not especially harmful. When fragmented into tiny particles, however, silica can be dangerous if inhaled in excess of certain levels for a prolonged period. Plaintiffs in silica cases assert that they suffer from a disease--primarily silicosis, or scarring of the lungs--as a result of exposure to silica dust through their occupations in various industries. RAND notes: "Workers in many industries, including mining, quarrying, construction, glass, cement, abrasives, ceramics, and iron and steel mills, can be exposed to silica." (6)

The risks of silica exposure have been well-known for a long time. For instance, as far back as 1949, the United States Supreme Court noted: "It is a matter of common knowledge that it is injurious to the lungs and dangerous to the health to work in silica dust." (7)

The Federal Occupational Safety & Health Administration ("OSHA") has regulated workplace silica exposure since the early 1970s. (8) Today, OSHA provides detailed regulations requiring employers to protect employees from overexposure to silica through the enforcement of permissible exposure limits ("PELs") for occupational exposure to airborne silica (9) and the OSHA Hazard Communications Standard. (10) States also have acted to protect workers from overexposure. For instance, many states set threshold levels for silica dust in the workplace, (11) prohibit minors from working with silica refractory products, (12) and offer other worker protections. (13)

The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention ("CDC") and the National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health ("NIOSH") have reported that nationwide silicosis deaths declined sharply, from 1,157 in 1968, to 448 in 1980, to 308 in 1990, to 187 in 1999, to 148 in 2002--a 93% decline in overall mortality. (14) Similarly, a 2005 study by OSHA staff found "a downward trend in the airborne silica exposure levels" from 1988-2003. (15) RAND found that "[b]etween 1995 and 2004, silicosis-related deaths were generally stable or decreasing in all states." (16)

For years, silica litigation generally reflected this public health success. The litigation was stable with only a low number of people pursuing silica claims in any given year. (17)

B. A Spike in Silica Claims

"[P]laintiffs' lawyers filed an unprecedented number of silica cases from 2002 to 2004--a total of 20,479 cases in Mississippi alone--an amount 'five times greater than one would expect over the same period in the entire United States." (18) The drastic rise in claims against U.S. Silica, a leading supplier, exemplified this surge. In 1998, U.S. Silica was named in 198 silicosis claims; the number of claims jumped to 1,356 in 2001 before soaring to 5,277 in 2002 and skyrocketing to 19,865 in 2003. (19) Nearly two-thirds of the claims filed against U.S. Silica between 2001 and 2003 were filed in Mississippi state courts; most of the other cases were filed in Texas state courts.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

RAND Institute for Civil Justice Report on the Abuse of Medical Diagnostic Practices in Mass Tort Litigation: Lessons Learned from the "Phantom" Silica Epidemic That May Deter Litigation Screening Abuse
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?