Columbia, SC personal injury attorney Graham Newman talks about the difference between multidistrict litigation and class action litigation. He states that while multi-district litigation (MDL) and class action litigation share similarities, they remain distinct legal mechanisms, and even experienced attorneys sometimes conflate the two. A class action involves a single case in which one individual represents the interests of a larger group—potentially hundreds or even thousands of people—whose claims are uniform and can be addressed collectively in one proceeding.

By contrast, multi-district litigation consolidates numerous individual cases that raise common questions of fact or law. Each plaintiff maintains a separate claim, but the cases are grouped together for efficiency, often to resolve shared issues before being remanded to their home jurisdictions for trial.

He illustrates the distinction with examples. In a class action, a uniform issue such as the interpretation of an insurance policy may be suitable because the same contractual language applies equally to all policyholders. However, in personal injury litigation—such as cases alleging that exposure to Roundup causes non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma—a class action is not feasible. Each plaintiff must prove that their individual cancer resulted from exposure, a determination that requires specific, fact-intensive analysis.

Still, he notes, common questions exist in such cases—for instance, whether Roundup is capable of causing cancer at all. Because this issue applies universally to all plaintiffs, courts often establish MDL proceedings. Through MDL, those overarching questions can be resolved efficiently, after which the individual cases return to their respective jurisdictions for trial on the plaintiff-specific issues.