At the MTMP Spring ‘25 session titled “Know When to Stay or Walk Away: Strategies to Evaluate a New and Emerging Mass Tort,” panelists broke down the essential considerations attorneys must weigh when deciding whether to pursue a new mass tort.

Levin Papantonio Rafferty attorney Sara Papantonio took the stage to guide attorneys through one of the most critical decisions in mass tort practice: when to dive in and when to walk away. In this session, Papantonio broke down three levels of involvement attorneys can take—passive, referral, and active—each carrying its own risk, responsibility, and reward.

“Passive involvement,” she explained, “is when you’ve made money in personal injury, want to dip your toe into mass torts through marketing, but have no plans to litigate.”

“Referral involvement,” by contrast, appeals to firms that want to know their clients and participate in the process without handling the docket directly.

For those ready to take the plunge, “active involvement” means managing the docket, defending discovery, and ultimately going to trial—a path Papantonio’s firm knows intimately.

Drawing on a decade of experience in major multidistrict litigation (MDLs), including leadership roles in opioid trials and multiple bellwether cases, Papantonio emphasized that smart risk assessment is the foundation of every successful decision in mass torts.

“The first question you ask yourself when a new case hits the docket is, what is my risk profile?” she told the crowd. She outlined four critical factors every firm should scrutinize:

• the nature of the injury
• the strength of the science
• the size and quality of the plaintiff population
• the scope of potential damages

“Each one of them contributes to your risk profile,” she said. “Right? Am I a high-risk mass tort attorney or a low-risk one?”

As an example, she reflected on Levin Papantonio’s early entry into the national opioids litigation. “When we presented this opioids case at MTMP, everyone said it was a huge risk, and it was, but the risk paid off,” Papantonio explained.

The opioids litigation became one of the most ambitious undertakings in the history of mass torts, uniting powerhouse litigators and negotiators from across the country. Through innovative collaboration, strategic use of big data, and a relentless focus on accountability, the effort resulted in over $60 billion in opioid settlements. These funds are now being used to support recovery, prevention, and treatment efforts in cities, counties, and states across the U.S. that were devastated by the prescription opiate addiction crisis.

Papantonio also cautioned attorneys about the “salesmanship” that runs rampant in the early days of emerging torts. “Everyone is selling you the best case,” she warned. “Not every case is the next tobacco.”

Papantonio also shared that Levin Papantonio has a dedicated scientific vetting committee that meets weekly to evaluate the evolving body of research tied to potential torts.

“Many people here will tell you, there are huge risks [with mass tort litigation], and you have to play it smart,” she added. With careful vetting and strong partnerships—especially with firms like hers that routinely collaborate with smaller or newer entrants—attorneys can transition from curious observers to effective litigators.

“MTMP is a great place to start building the skills to scrutinize and strategize,” she added. “You just have to know what you’re looking for—and what to walk away from.”