We recently gave a talk on things in MDLs that drive us crazy.
Discovery is front and center. The asymmetry of discovery is a huge
source of unfairness. If plaintiffs have their way, all discovery
would be about company conduct, and we'd never get to find out
if those 8,000 plaintiffs used the product or suffered an injury.
Mere details. And don't get us started on a plaintiffs'
insistence that we "certify" that our discovery is
complete. That certification is both an insult and a departure from
the Rules. Plaintiff lawyers might seek such certification in any
case, but they definitely will seek it in an MDL, where discovery
is most difficult, one-sided, and expensive.
Okay, now you went and got us started. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(g)(1) requires that "every discovery request,
response, or objection must be signed by at least one attorney of
record ... [to certify] that to the best of the person's
knowledge, information, and belief formed after a
