Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United States | 1-800-335-6202

In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation

Document Cited authorities 199 Cited in 140 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Decision Date25 September 1984
Docket NumberMDL No. 381.
Citation597 F. Supp. 740
PartiesIn re "AGENT ORANGE" PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

597 F. Supp. 740

In re "AGENT ORANGE" PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION.

MDL No. 381.

United States District Court, E.D. New York.

September 25, 1984 as Modified.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Stephen J. Schlegel, Schlegel & Trafelet, Ltd., Chicago, Ill.; Benton Musslewhite, Law Offices of Benton Musslewhite, Inc., Houston, Tex.; Thomas Henderson, Henderson & Goldberg, Pittsburgh, Pa.; Phillip E. Brown, Hoberg, Finger, Brown, Cox & Molligan, San Francisco, Cal.; Stanley Chesley, Waite, Schneider, Bayless & Chesley, Cincinnati, Ohio; John M. O'Quinn, O'Quinn, Hagans & Wettman, Houston, Tex.; Neil R. Peterson and Gene Locks, Greitzer & Locks, Philadelphia, Pa.; Newton B. Schwartz, Houston, Tex.; Irving Like, Reilly, Like and Schneider, Babylon, N.Y.; David J. Dean, Dean, Falanga & Rose, Carle Place, N.Y.; Aaron Twerski, Hempstead, N.Y., of counsel, for plaintiffs.

Leonard Rivkin, Rivkin, Leff, Sherman & Radler, Garden City, N.Y.; Philip Pakula, Townley & Updike, New York City; Wendell B. Alcorn, Jr., Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, New York City; William Krohley, Kelley, Drye & Warren, New York City; Thomas Beck, Arthur, Dry & Kalish, New York City; Richard Goldstein, Shea & Gould, New York City, of counsel; David M. Gross, Budd, Larner, Kent, Gross, Picillo & Rosenbaum, New York City; Henry G. Miller, Clark, Gagliardi & Miller, White Plains, N.Y.; for defendants.

Arvin Maskin, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for third-party defendant United States.

WEINSTEIN, Chief Judge. 

                                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS
                Preface and Summary ------------------------------------------------------------   746
                Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------------   748
                I.    Procedural History -------------------------------------------------------   750
                      A. Jurisdiction ----------------------------------------------------------   754
                      B. Conflict of Laws ------------------------------------------------------   755
                      C. Class Action ----------------------------------------------------------   755
                      D. Status of Third Party Complaints --------------------------------------   757
                II.   Fairness Hearings --------------------------------------------------------   758
                      A. Legal Requirements ----------------------------------------------------   758
                      B. Reaction of Class Members ---------------------------------------------   764
                         1. Hearings -----------------------------------------------------------   764
                            a. Need for Medical Help for Veterans and Financial Help for Those
                               Too Ill to Work -------------------------------------------------   765
                            b. Need for Medical and Financial Aid for Children Born with Birth
                               Defects ---------------------------------------------------------   765
                            c. Need for Information on Possible Genetic Damage to Veterans
                               and Their Children ----------------------------------------------   766
                            d. Dissatisfaction with the Veterans Administration and the Treatment
                               Received in its Hospitals ---------------------------------------   766
                            e. Inadequacy of the Settlement Amount to Pay Adequate Damages -----   767
                            f. Failure of Chemical Companies to Admit Fault --------------------   768
                            g. Failure of Government to Admit Fault, Participate in Settlement
                               and Accept its Responsibility for Caring for Veterans and their
                               Children --------------------------------------------------------   768
                            h. Possibility of a Coverup of Information with Sealed Files and
                               Return of Documents to Defendants -------------------------------   769
                            i. Need for a Full Open Trial to Vindicate the Plaintiffs and Protect
                               Their Rights to Individual Justice ------------------------------   770
                            j. Inability to Decide Whether to Accept Settlement Without Knowing
                               How it Would be Distributed and How Much would be Spent
                               in Attorneys' Fees ----------------------------------------------   771
                            k. Inadequate Payment by Defendants Relative to Their Resources ----   771
                            l. Inadequate Time to File Claims ----------------------------------   771
                            m. Need to Settle Now to Get on with Life --------------------------   771
                            n. Need for Further Research and Reassurances ----------------------   772
                         2. Written Communications ---------------------------------------------   773
                III.  Factual Problems with Claims ---------------------------------------------   775
                      A. Use of Agent Orange in Vietnam ----------------------------------------   775
                      B. Claimed Effects of Contact with Agent Orange in Vietnam ---------------   777
                         1. General Considerations ---------------------------------------------   777
                         2. Plaintiffs' Evidence of Causality ----------------------------------   782
                      C. Scientific Studies on Causality ---------------------------------------   787
                      D. Knowledge of Government and Defendants --------------------------------   795
                IV.   Legal Problems with Claims -----------------------------------------------   799
                      A. Statutes of Limitations -----------------------------------------------   800
                         1. Introduction -------------------------------------------------------   800
                         2. Standard Multijurisdictional Approach ------------------------------   800
                            a. CPLR 202 --------------------------------------------------------   800
                            b. Application of CPLR 202 to Agent Orange Litigation --------------   802
                            c. CPLR 214 --------------------------------------------------------   804
                
                         3. Single Time-bar Period Based Upon Federal or National Consensus
                            Law ----------------------------------------------------------------   804
                            a. Federal Substantive Law -----------------------------------------   804
                            b. National Consensus Law ------------------------------------------   804
                         4. Single Time-bar Period for Class Actions ---------------------------   805
                            a. General Theory --------------------------------------------------   805
                            b. Federal ---------------------------------------------------------   806
                            c. New York --------------------------------------------------------   808
                         5. Single Time-bar Period for American Veterans Based Upon Interpretation
                            of New York Statute ------------------------------------------------   810
                            a. Constitutionality -----------------------------------------------   811
                            b. Construing Provisions to Apply to Nonresidents ------------------   813
                         6. Wives and Children -------------------------------------------------   815
                         7. Vietnam Veterans Living Abroad -------------------------------------   816
                         8. Conclusion on Statutes of Limitations ------------------------------   816
                      B. Failure to Determine Who Was Harmed and Who Caused Harm ---------------   816
                         1. Facts --------------------------------------------------------------   817
                         2. Law ----------------------------------------------------------------   819
                            a. The Problem of the Indeterminate Defendant ----------------------   819
                               (1) Introduction ------------------------------------------------   819
                               (2) Applicable Law ----------------------------------------------   820
                                   (a) Enterprise Liability ------------------------------------   820
                                       (i) Legal Theory ----------------------------------------   820
                                      (ii) Application of Enterprise Liability Theory to this
                                           Case ------------------------------------------------   821
                                   (b) Alternative Liability and Its Variations ----------------   822
                                       (i) Legal Theory ----------------------------------------   822
                                      (ii) Application of Alternative Liability to this Case ---   826
                                   (c) Defendants' Individual Duty to Warn the Government
                                       of Dangers ----------------------------------------------   828
                                       (i) Duty to Warn of Danger in Their Own Product ---------   828
                                      (ii) Duty to Warn of Dangers in Another's Product --------   830
                                   (d) Summary -------------------------------------------------   833
                            b. The Problem of the Indeterminate Plaintiff ----------------------   833
                               (1) Scope of the Problem ----------------------------------------   834
                               (2) Preponderance Rule ------------------------------------------   835
                                   (a) Application of the Preponderance Rule to Mass Exposure
                                       Cases ---------------------------------------------------   836
                                   (b) Inadequacy of Individualized Solutions ------------------   837
                               (3) Possible Solution in a Class Action -------------------------   837
                                   (a) Analogy and Precedent -----------------------------------   839
                                       (i) Employment Discrimination Cases ---------------------   839
                                      (ii) Consumer Class Actions ------------------------------   840
                                   (b) Practical Advantages of Class-wide Solution -------------   841
                         3. Conclusion as to Indeterminate Defendants and Plaintiffs -----------   842
                      C. Nature of Liability and Relations to Defense of Government Knowledge --   843
                         1. Introduction -------------------------------------------------------   843
                         2. Defense Production Act ---------------------------------------------   843
                         3. Law to be
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
176 cases
  • Werlein v. US
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 4 Septiembre 1990
    ...for personal injuries allegedly caused by the defoliant Agent Orange. The case was certified as a class action, and settled. 597 F.Supp. 740 (E.D.N.Y.1984). However, several hundred class members chose to opt-out of the class prior to settlement, and to proceed with their claims. The court ......
  • Bynum v. FMC Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 13 Septiembre 1985
    ... ... -appellant Daniel Edward Bynum brought this product liability action in district court seeking damages for ... compensation system, which normally requires no litigation, is not negligible or niggardly ... The recoveries compare ... Supreme Court's reference to the contractor as an "agent or officer of the Government," id. at 21, 60 S.Ct. at 414, ... 1142, 1151-52 (N.D.Cal.1982); In re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation, 534 F.Supp. 1046, 1055 ... ...
  • 210 E. 86th St. Corp. v. Combustion Engineering
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 31 Marzo 1993
    ... ... approaches to determining so-called "alternative liability," based on market share, participation in illegal ...         Plaintiffs also rely on In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 597 F.Supp. 740, 823 ... ...
  • In re Joint E. & S. Dist. Asbestos Litigation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • 19 Enero 1995
    ... ... The Corporation itself was set free of its liability; all claims were to be made against the Trust. See In re Johns-Manville ... The Settlement was not the product of fraud or collusion ...         Class counsel and counsel for ... See In re "Agent Orange" Prod. Liability Litig., 611 F.Supp. 1296, 1303-04 (E.D.N.Y.1985), ... ...
    • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • The Next Best Thing - Or Not
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 7 Octubre 2013
    ...and eventually the doctrine began to take shape as a class action-specific remedial tool. (In re Agent Orange Prod. Liab. Litig., 597 F. Supp. 740, 841 (E.D.N.Y. 1984) (discussing disagreement among federal courts about doctrine); Simer v. Rios, 661 F.2d 655, 675-677 (7th Cir. 1981) (discus......
6 books & journal articles
  • Nonbelievers and Government Speech
    • United States
    • Iowa Law Review No. 97-2, January 2012
    • 1 Enero 2012
    ...shifts to defendants to show that their particular conduct or product was not a cause-in-fact. In re “Agent Orange” Prod. Liab. Litig., 597 F. Supp. 740, 832 (E.D.N.Y. 1984) (using burden-shifting to solve the indeterminate-defendant problem), aff’d , 818 F.2d 145 (2d Cir. 1987); Abel v. El......
  • Toxic apportionment: a causation and risk contribution model.
    • United States
    • Environmental Law Vol. 25 No. 3, June 1995
    • 22 Junio 1995
    ...because "to require precision of proof would impose an insurmountable burden"). (28) See, e.g., In re Agent Orange Prod. Liab. Litig., 597 F. Supp. 740 (E.D.N.Y. 1984), affd, 818 F.2d 145 (2d Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1004 (1988) (approving a class action settlement, Judge Jack Wei......
  • Prometheus Unbound: The Gulf Coast Claims Facility as a Means for Resolving Mass Tort Claims?A Fund Too Far
    • United States
    • Louisiana Law Review No. 71-3, April 2011
    • 1 Abril 2011
    ...re ― Agent Orange ‖ Prod. Liab. Litig., 818 F.2d 145 (upholding class action settlement). 523. In re ―Agent Orange‖ Prod. Liab. Litig., 597 F. Supp. 740 (E.D.N.Y. 1984), aff’d , 818 F.2d 145 (2d Cir. 1987). 524. Id. 525. See, e.g., Martha L. Minow, The Judge for the Situation: Judge Jack We......
  • THE UNDEMOCRATIC CLASS ACTION.
    • United States
    • Washington University Law Review Vol. 100 No. 3, February 2023
    • 1 Febrero 2023
    ...Beckerman, supra note 62, at 2066-67 (1995). (179.) Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2). (180.) See, e.g., In re Agent Orange Prod. Liab. Litig., 597 F. Supp. 740, 761 (E.D.N.Y. 1984), affd, 818 F.2d 145 (2d Cir. 1987) (collecting (181.) See, e.g., Almendares, supra note 48, at 294 and the citations t......
    • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT