WASHINGTON – For an eight consecutive year, St. Louis again finds itself on the annual list of Judicial Hellholes.
St. Louis is listed as the eighth worst jurisdiction for businesses in the nation on the annual report released December 5 by the American Tort Reform Association. St. Louis also was ranked eighth last year.
“Judges in St. Louis seem to have embraced their reputation for skirting both state law and U.S. Supreme Court precedent,” the ATRA report states. “They have allowed junk science to enter their courtrooms, going so far as to allow expert witnesses to testify who other courts have found unreliable.
“Nuclear verdicts are becoming more frequent. Not only are plaintiffs from other states flocking to the jurisdiction, but international parties are coming to St. Louis courts as well.
“Much-needed civil justice reform legislation has stalled in Missouri for the past few years, and the Legislature must prioritize reforms to address the lawsuit abuse bogging down business in the state.”
St. Louis courts are the home to tens of thousands of lawsuits against Monsanto for its Roundup weed killer. The cases allege the active ingredient glyphosate causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
“Despite the Missouri Legislature requiring closer scrutiny of proposed expert testimony in 2017 by adopting a standard consistent with federal courts and most other state courts, St. Louis judges have allowed junk science in their courtrooms,” the ATRA report states. “Because of this, law firms across the country are flocking to St. Louis to file their lawsuits.
ATRA says Monsanto has successfully defended itself in most cases in St. Louis. But it says “the judges continue to stack the deck against them.”
“For St. Louis to move off the Judicial Hellholes list, judges must embrace their role as gatekeepers at the outset of trial and not allow junk science to be heard in their courtrooms,” the Hellholes reports says.
ATRA also says the City of St. Louis wants in on the litigation action as well.
In March, the city sued Hyundai and Kia in federal court for manufacturing, marketing, distributing and selling automobiles that lack an anti-theft “engine immobilizer.”
“Rather than hold thieves responsible for their criminal actions, St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones blames the auto manufacturers for contributing to a significant rise in vehicle thefts in St. Louis,” ATRA says in its report. “Among other claims, the city alleges that the companies created a public nuisance because stolen cars represent a public safety hazard, contribute to violence, and divert St. Louis law enforcement of resources as they respond to property destruction and dangerous driving of stolen cars around the city.”
ATRA also says St. Louis remains a preferred jurisdiction for asbestos litigation.
As of July, St. Louis had seen a 10.5% increase in filings and was the fifth most popular jurisdiction for filing asbestos cases nationwide.
“Plaintiffs’ lawyers filed more asbestos lawsuits through the first seven months of this year than all of the previously recorded years,” the report states, also citing a 2022 nuclear verdict in one asbestos case.
“In Trokey v. Chesterton Co., the plaintiff claimed he was exposed to asbestos while working on Ford brakes as a gas sta-tion mechanic, causing him to develop mesothelioma,” ATRA states. “Ford argued that the plaintiff never worked for Ford, did not regularly work as a mechanic and that his exposure likely came from a source other than brake linings.
“Nonetheless, the jury awarded $20 million – $10 million to him and $10 million to his wife. The $20 million award was the same amount the plaintiffs’ lawyer requested in his closing argument.”
That case is on appeal.
ATRA also said Missouri ranks in the top-10 states for most nuclear verdicts in personal injury and wrongful death cases from 2010 to 2019. Nuclear verdicts are those that exceed $10 million.
It says one of the factors contributing to these massive verdicts is the allowance of “anchoring.”
“Missouri law permits plaintiffs’ lawyers to urge juries to return a specific amount to compensate a person for his or her pain and suffering and other subjective noneconomic damages,” the Hellholes report states. “Lawyers will suggest an unreasonably large award, making that number an ‘anchor’ point in jurors’ minds.
“As a result, jurors can be manipulated into awarding levels that are far beyond amounts they would otherwise reach and that truly serve a compensatory purpose.”
It cites a September verdict in which parents were awarded $745 million after a 25-year-old woman was struck and killed on the sidewalk by a driver who had passed out after consuming nitrous oxide. The driver had purchased the nitrous oxide chargers from a shop in St. Louis called Coughing Cardinal, and United Brands manufactured, distributed and sold the nitrous oxide under the name “Whip-It!” as a food propellant.
The lawsuit alleged that United Brands, Coughing Cardinal and others are involved in an illicit nitrous oxide distribution ring and marketed it to young individuals despite known dangers. It essentially tagged United Brands as the supplier and Coughing Cadinal as the drug dealer.
“United Brands argued that it is no more liable than a beer manufacturer would be for a drunk driver causing a wrongful death,” ATRA’s report states. “The driver alone should be liable for misusing the product by inhaling it.”
The jury ultimately assigned 10% liability to the driver, 20% to Coughing Cardinal and 70% to United Brands.
The report also cites three other 2023 St. Louis nuclear verdicts.
Other 2023 nuclear verdicts include an $11 million product liability verdict, a $15 million wrongful death verdict and a $10 million car accident verdict.
ATRA also touched on “phantom damages” as a reason for increased damage awards.
In 2017, the Missouri Legislature passed an overhaul of the collateral source rule to limit damages to the amount actually paid for medical care.
“In recent years, however, Missouri courts have allowed plaintiffs’ lawyers to introduce evidence of inflated amounts billed purportedly to show the severity of the plaintiff’s injuries, rather than the amount of damages sought,” the ATRA report states. “Allowing this evidence has artificially increased damage awards, delayed settlement of cases and increased the cost of insurance premiums in Missouri.
“Missouri should close the loophole and prohibit courts from admitting evidence of billed amounts for medical treatment that no one ever paid.”
The report also says St. Louis has gained an international reputation as a plaintiff-friendly court.
Beginning in 2007, several international plaintiffs filed lawsuits against American companies in St. Louis over a Peruvian company’s operation of a smelting facility in the Andes Mountains. The case was removed to federal court.
“Though the allegation that the facility’s emissions harmed nearby residents was brought by Peruvian citizens against a Peruvian company based on its Peruvian operations that are subject to Peruvian environmental law, a federal court ruled that it would decide the case, applying Missouri tort law,” ATRA states.
In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit agreed to hear the case. If the Eighth Circuit uphold the lower court’s decision, ATRA says there is vast potential liability for American businesses engaged in legitimate international activity.
The Associated Industries of Missouri described the potential impact.
“St. Louis City juries, which are well known for issuing record-setting verdicts, will be invited to assess liability against companies located anywhere in the world on behalf of foreign nationals who have never been to Missouri, irrespective of the law or policy of the foreign nation,” AIM states.
In addition, ATRA says imposing the standards of Missouri tort law upon an environmental remediation project in Peru has significant international implications, overriding a country’s sovereign right to regulate and enforce its own environmental and economic development policies.
“It would give a green light for opportunistic plaintiffs’ lawyers to bring foreign suits in U.S. courts, seeking to apply favorable state laws in friendly courts,” ATRA states.
The reform group also says needed reforms continue to stall in the Missouri Legislature because “several legislators have accepted campaign contributions from the trial bar and are now doing its bidding.”
It notes Republican state Senator Mike Moon, who accepted a total of $24,850 in contributions from the trial bar from 2014 to 2022.
Fellow Republican state Senator Bill Eigel, who is running for governor, has collected almost $33,000 in trial bar donations, according to ATRA.
“Notably, Senator Eigel enjoys support from the Believe in Life and Liberty (BILL) PAC, which, over the years, has received $306,169 in contributions from trial lawyers,” ATRA states. “Additionally, Senator Eigel is backed by the 100 PAC, which has accepted $183,560 in trial lawyer donations.”
Georgia courts as well as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas were tied for the top ranking, saying those jurisdictions are the most unfriendly to businesses. Those courts were followed by Cook County, Illinois; California; New York City; South Carolina Asbestos Litigation; Lansing, Michigan; Louisiana; and St. Louis.
Judicial Hellholes is a program of the American Tort Reform Foundation. Created in 2002, it documents abuses within the civil justice system. ATRF is a sister organization of ATRA, which is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.