Product 1

2024-2025 Executive Summary

The 2024-2025 Judicial Hellholes® report shines its brightest spotlight on 10 jurisdictions that have earned reputations as Judicial Hellholes®. Some are known for allowing innovative lawsuits to proceed or for welcoming litigation tourism, and in all of them state leadership seems eager to expand civil liability at every given opportunity.

2024-2025 Hellholes

2024-2025 Judicial Hellhole Report

Every year we shine a light on the worst of the worst. The report shines its brightest spotlight on jurisdictions or courts that have earned reputations as Judicial Hellholes®.

download report

JUDICIAL HELLHOLES SUMMARIES

#1 THE PHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON  PLEAS & THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Lawsuit abuse in the City of Brotherly Love has reached a fever pitch with nuclear verdicts becoming the norm and novel theories of liability flourishing. Eye-popping nine- figure damage awards were issued without hardly a thought and medical liability lawsuits continue to flood the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas due to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision to eliminate an important requirement for entry. The situation is not expected to improve as a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision allows for duplicative damages in certain types of cases.

#2 NEW YORK CITY A “fraudemic” hit the Big Apple in 2024. Some of the worst examples of lawsuit abuse came to light in New York City with the filing of several RICO lawsuits against plaintiffs’ firms. Unique New York laws like the Scaffold Law and the state’s consumer protection act are ripe for abuse and plaintiffs’ lawyers have seized the opportunity to cash in.

#3 SOUTH CAROLINA ASBESTOS LITIGATION South Carolina’s asbestos judge has a clear bias against corporate defendants. This bias is obvious in rulings that result in unfair trials and severe verdicts. Anti- corporate bias is also evident in the judge’s imposition of unwarranted sanctions, a willingness to overturn or modify jury verdicts to benefit plaintiffs, and frequent appointment of a receiver to maximize recoveries from insurers.

#4 GEORGIA Georgia’s civil justice system is plagued by skyrocketing nuclear verdicts®, inflated awards for medical costs, expansive premises liability, and laws that set-up defendants to fail creating endless liability. Georgia courts also continue to embrace an archaic seatbelt gag rule that precludes a jury from hearing evidence about whether an occupant wore a seatbelt at the time of a crash.

#5 CALIFORNIA The trial bar goes to California to pursue innovative new theories of liability and push the envelope with regard to expanding liability for business. The state also has the most nuclear verdicts® of any state in the country and the state attorney general is leading the charge in baseless environmental litigation. The state’s unique Lemon Law is a gold mine for plaintiffs’ lawyers and “no-injury” Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) and Americans with Disability Act (ADA) accessibility lawsuits bog down business.

#6 COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS The county is home to a disproportionate amount of the state’s litigation and nuclear verdicts®. No-injury litigation, including claims filed under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act and consumer protection laws, is the main contributor to Cook County’s sustained appearance on the Judicial Hellholes® list. The county is a hotbed for asbestos litigation and Illinois plaintiffs’ lawyers contribute millions of dollars to campaigns to maintain the status quo.

#7 ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI Judges in St. Louis issue plaintiff-friendly rulings and embrace junk science, signaling to plaintiffs’ lawyers across the country, and now the globe, that St. Louis courts are open for their business. St. Louis courts also remain a hotspot for asbestos lawsuits. Rather than address rampant lawsuit abuse, the Missouri legislature has turned a blind eye and has been complicit in creating an unjust legal system.

#8 THE MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT The Michigan Supreme Court sent mixed signals about junk science, continues to take an expansive approach to premises liability and created innovative new ways for employees to sue their employers.

#9 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON The county makes its first ever appearance on the Judicial Hellholes® list thanks to judges’ proclivity for unfair group trials, allowing junk science, and substitution of the laws of other states for Washington law when favorable to plaintiffs.

#10 LOUISIANA Nuclear verdicts® plague the state’s civil justice system, bringing it in line with other Judicial Hellholes®. Meanwhile, the Louisiana Supreme Court caved to political pressure from the plaintiffs’ bar and discarded established constitutional protections in favor of lawsuits. Perennial issues also plague the state’s civil justice system – coastal litigation bogs down the state’s economy and fallout from “Operation Sideswipe” continues.

WATCH LIST

Beyond the Judicial Hellholes®, this report calls attention to an additional jurisdiction that bears watching due to its history of expanding liability.

TEXAS’S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT The Texas Supreme Court overturned three noteworthy liability-expanding decisions issued by the Texas Court of Appeals for the Fifth District. There is a continued need for oversight of this state intermediate appellate court to ensure that it stays in line with Texas precedent and does not expand liability in the state.

DISHONORABLE MENTIONS

Dishonorable Mentions comprise singularly unsound court decisions, abusive practices or other actions that erode the fairness of a state’s civil justice system and are not otherwise detailed in other sections of the report.

Included among this year’s list, the Maryland high court rejected a higher standard for expert evidence, Tennessee is a new hotspot for abusive Americans with Disabilities Act Litigation, and three Illinois counties remain the venue of choice for asbestos claims.

POINTS OF LIGHT

This year’s report again enthusiastically emphasizes the good news from some Judicial Hellholes® and other jurisdictions across the country. Points of Light are examples of fair and balanced judicial decisions that adhere to the rule of law.

Among the positive developments, several states strengthened their expert evidence rules, federal courts stressed the importance of judicial gatekeeping, and the Third Circuit ruled that lawsuits alleging that a product contained insufficient warnings, despite federal approval, cannot proceed. Additionally, the Kentucky Court of Appeals overturned a problematic ruling that helped land the state on last year’s Watch List and the Utah Supreme Court upheld the state’s statute of repose for medical liability lawsuits.

CLOSER LOOKS

THE SEARCH FOR JACKPOT JUSTICE – TRIAL LAWYERS SET SIGHTS ON NEW INDUSTRY In America’s courtrooms a disturbing trend is unfolding that threatens the health and lives of the most vulnerable among us: premature infants relying on life-sustaining baby formula. Trial lawyers, armed with dubious science and driven by the prospect of massive paydays, have zeroed in on baby formula manufacturers, risking yet another public health crisis that could leave parents scrambling.

THE LOOMING LEGAL BATTLE OVER PLASTICS Plaintiffs’ lawyers are partnering with local and state governments, NGOs and environmental activists to target corporations they allege are responsible for the “plastics pollution crisis.” The trial bar is seeking to represent local and state governments in a concerted effort to shift costs associated with recycling and pollution onto plastic manufacturers and the oil and gas industry. The flood of lawsuits creates legal chaos. It may fill government budget gaps and line the pockets of trial lawyers, but it does little to help people or solve problems.

HIDDEN OUTSIDE MONEY POURS INTO CIVIL LITIGATION: THIRD PARTY LITIGATION FUNDING Civil litigation provides a means of resolving disputes between parties, those named in a lawsuit as plaintiffs and defendants. Common law doctrines traditionally prohibited “strangers” to a lawsuit from meddling in litigation or having a financial interest in the outcome due to the potential for litigation abuse. As those principles have fallen by the wayside, outside investors have poured money into civil litigation. Today, funders include commercial litigation finance companies, hedge funds, businesses, and wealthy individuals. There are even now litigation funders that fund other litigation funders. The outside financiers are not just funding litigation, they are creating it.

Latest News

View all News