Start the conversation

Class Action Lawsuits

We’re trial lawyers. Our core competency – above everything else – is trying cases to juries. And we specialize in beating giants.

Minneapolis Class Action Lawyer

Madia Law LLC will fight for the wrongfully injured. If you’re seeking justice, you may find that your case has similar qualities to others. While you may have thought your accident and injuries were an isolated incident, others may have suffered similar injuries because of the same cause. If this is the case, then you may be able to take part of a class action lawsuit. When this is the best option for you and others to get the justice you deserve, it’s vital to have an experienced Minneapolis class action lawyer on your side.

Class action works a little differently than a typical personal injury case. Because so many people were affected in a similar manner, one or more plaintiffs will represent the injured group in the lawsuit. This also allows the evidence to be provided in one comprehensive case, as opposed to each plaintiff filing a separate claim for similar reasons. 

Class Action Law in Minnesota

If you’ve been injured and you’re wondering if you have grounds for a class action lawsuit, there are a few pieces of criteria that must apply to the situation. Your lawyers will see if the following four criteria are present for a Minnesota class action lawsuit:

  • The class has so many members that gathering everyone wouldn’t be practicable.
  • Questions of law or fact are common to the class.
  • The representative parties have claims or defenses that are typical of the class’ claims or defenses.
  • The representative parties will protect the class’ best interests.

After these prerequisites are met, your lawyer will look into if the class action is maintainable. This means that if there was prosecution of separate actions by individual class members, there would be risk for inconsistent adjudications to the members.

If you have any questions about the validity of your case, your lawyer will be able to answer them. We’ll see if what happened to you has grounds for moving forward with a class action.

Common Types of Class Action Cases

When a large group of people have been harmed in a similar way by the same party, a class action lawsuit could be a possible way to get justice. This case can apply to a variety of industries. Some of the common cases may involve:

  • Defective Medical Devices. If a medical device has an issue that results in harm to many of the people who depend on it, they may have grounds for legal action.
  • Defective Auto Parts. A car could have defects or a certain auto parts could malfunction and cause similar problems for drivers. For example, if a company sold defective tires, many people could have bee injured in car accidents.
  • Manufacturing Errors. If a specific product from a manufacturing plant was malfunctioning, it’s possible the issue stemmed from that particular plant. Those who were injured by the product from this plant may be able to seek legal action.
  • Dangerous Drugs. Dangerous drugs can include those taking medication that’s later revealed to be carcinogenic, cause other illnesses, or to have other side effects that they weren’t warned about beforehand.

Consumers deserve to have their rights protected when a company or industry has harmed them. Our lawyers will go over what happened to you and discuss your options on how to proceed.

How Can a Class Action Lawyer Help You?

When you and a group of others have all been harmed by the same party, you’re all likely dealing with the same stressful situation. You may be recovering from injuries and now have medical expenses that you need to pay. Your injuries could prevent you from going to work and being able to maintain a consistent source of income. Other outcomes of the injury also include the emotional distress and mental anguish of what happened and how it will continue to affect you.

These injustices are not lost or forgotten when you have a class action case. Our lawyers will do everything possible to hold the negligent party accountable for their actions so you can get the compensation you deserve. You can have peace of mind that your Minneapolis class action lawyer will fight for your best interests.

When you’re pursing this kind of legal case, it’s important to know that these cases can be settled and never reach a court room. In this case, the victims can receive the settlement to cover the costs of what they’ve lost. A judge will decide if the settlement is fair to the injured members of the class. However, these cases can proceed to court. Both sides will present their case and the decision is left to a jury.

We understand that getting involved in a class action lawsuit may feel intimidating. However, these can be effective in providing justice to those who need it and showing the negligent company how they harmed or misled others. A class action allows you and others to take litigious action. If, for example, you had a claim that was for minor damages, the costs of pursuing legal action against the company may not make financial sense. By forming a class, the plaintiffs can seek justice in a unified manner that is much more cost-effective.

Your class action could also bring significant change to the product that caused your injuries. Whether it’s fixing a design flaw, packaging error, or providing more information about the risks of the product, your actions can protect others from going through the same experience.

Get the Help You Need Today

If you and a group of others have been hurt because of a negligent party, you deserve the chance to hold them accountable. Madia Law LLC is ready to help in any way we can.

We’ll carefully build your case and compile the evidence available to make sure your voice and the voices of the other injured class are heard. We will fight to get you fair compensation for your injuries. You will be able to move forward with financial security and the knowledge that you received justice.

THE MADIA LAW WAY

We have a process that works in getting exceptional results for our clients. 

We are trial lawyers who prepare every case for trial from Day 1. Investigation and legal research are the first things we do, and we spend a lot of time on them. Because we haven’t filed the case yet, we have complete control – the defendant has no say and we want to use this time wisely.  We interview witnesses that can help us prove the case.  We’ll ask you for all relevant documents in your possession and review those carefully as well.  We also will spend some time conducting legal research about unique issues in the case.  We pull the jury instructions that the judge will ultimately charge the jury with after closing arguments at trial. 

Our next step is typically to send a demand letter to the defendant. In the letter, we thoroughly lay out: the facts surrounding the defendant’s misconduct; the applicable law (including statutory and case citations) that make clear that the defendant broke the law; an analysis of your damages and the defendant’s monetary exposure; a demand for a monetary amount to settle the claim; and an instruction to preserve all relevant evidence, including electronic evidence. The point of this letter is to give the defendant a chance to do the right thing and pay a fair amount before litigation, and to give the defendant an opportunity to present any defenses or evidence it wants us to consider before moving forward.  Sometimes we skip the demand letter if there are strategic reasons to move straight to filing, but we typically give defendants a chance to do the right thing.

If early negotiations fail, great – we file a Complaint and serve the defendant with it. A Complaint is a legal document that states the facts of what happened and alleges how the defendant broke the law. It formally starts the lawsuit.  Many lawyers draft complaints in a general and relatively vague way, just to get it done and filed – because that’s all that’s really required.  We take a different view. We view the Complaint as our first chance to tell your story to the judge, and we take it seriously. So we draft detailed complaints and include legal citations to statutory and judicial authority on unique points.  Sometimes we’ll include a number of exhibits, diagrams, or other demonstrative aids to help the Court understand our claims.  A secondary benefit of this approach is that defense lawyers reading the Complaint can become educated on the problems of their case and the state of the law – sometimes this leads them to reach out to us shortly after service of the Complaint to re-initiate settlement negotiations.  Of course, by that time, the price for settlement has gone up.

Some lawyers view written discovery as a necessary evil – something to get done and out of the way before depositions.  Not us.  Written discovery is a gift and an opportunity.  We spend a great deal of time crafting requests for documents and interrogatories (questions for the defendant to answer in writing) that are specific, detailed, and tailored to get what we need to prove our case.  Many lawyers – even great ones – think written discovery is a waste of time because defense lawyers typically answer them on behalf of their clients and can try to stonewall with legalese and objections.  We view this as a wonderful opportunity.  In our experience, most defense lawyers can’t help themselves when answering discovery: they over-state their defenses and make assertions that their clients will not be able to support in testimony. So we get to commit the defendant to defenses that they can’t back up, leading to contradictions, confusion, and chaos in their depositions later on.  We also use Requests for Admission – which many lawyers don’t.  The Federal Rules and Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure allow us to ask defendants to “admit” certain facts.  We send them RFAs that are very difficult for them to deny.  Of course, they do it anyway, but that sets them up later for cost and fee-shifting, which the Rules mandate for defendants that deny RFAs that are later proven true.  And usually, we can get the defendants’ own witnesses to admit facts that their defense lawyers denied in RFA.  That’s a great situation that leads to more chaos and confusion on the defense side.

One last point on written discovery – we send multiple waves of it throughout discovery.  We typically send 3 or 4 sets of written discovery requests to defendants throughout discovery.  This compounds the problems for them, because the defense lawyers continue to overstate their defenses, but now run into contradictions from not just the defendant witnesses’ deposition testimony, but also their own previous discovery responses.  This makes for a great record that we can present to the judge at dispositive motions, and use for impeachment at trial.

This is our chance to question relevant witnesses, on the record with a court reporter (we typically videotape important depositions as well). We get to confront the defense witnesses with all of the evidence we’ve developed through written discovery and document production. By this time, the defendant put its witnesses in an impossible position through its written defenses, which are often untrue and indefensible.  So the witness has to either lie to support the defense, or admit it’s not true.  That’s a dilemma that works for our clients either way, no matter which option the witness takes.  We use depositions to expose contradictions, create a record for dispositive motions, lock witnesses into their stories so that we can impeach them later at trial, and sometimes, to show defense lawyers how hopeless their case is.  We often calls from defense counsel shortly after depositions of their clients, seeking to re-start settlement negotiations.

The defendant will usually make a motion for summary judgment after discovery, asking the Court to throw out the case without having a jury trial. Because we’ve hit discovery so hard – both through written discovery and depositions – this is a tough motion for defense counsel to write in our cases.  We draft our response for the Court and now get to bring everything together: the admissions, contradictions, nonsense, and obvious fact disputes that we’ve uncovered through discovery.  We tell a compelling story that wraps everything together for the Court and makes clear that the defense motion has to be denied, and the defendant needs to face a jury for its conduct.

Sometimes, we’ll even make an affirmative motion for summary judgment, asking the Court to grant judgment in favor of our client without a trial. These motions are generally rare for plaintiffs to make, because the defendant can usually point to some fact dispute on its intent or some other factor that necessitates a trial. But we make affirmative summary judgment motions significantly more than is typical for plaintiffs, and that’s because the work we put in during discovery helps build a fantastic record to do so.

After the Court denies the defense motion for summary judgment, the defendant has only 2 options: 1) do the right thing and pay you a fair amount to our client to settle your claim (usually much, much more at this point than the defendant could have paid at the beginning of the case to settle); or 2) face a jury for its conduct and risk an enormous verdict. This is the dilemma that we have been creating and forcing the defendant into for the entire case. We’ll engage in settlement negotiations at this point from a position of extreme strength, mainly because most defendants are (rightly) terrified of facing a jury to defend their conduct.

This is, candidly, our favorite part of the case – why we went to law school: to hold the powerful accountable before juries.  We prepare heavily for trial, including: detailed witness preparation, focus groups, and mock trials.  At this point, the potential outcomes and consequences for the defendant are much more severe than if it simply did the right thing at the beginning of the case and paid a fair amount to compensate our client for its misconduct.  As we advocate to the jury for our client, we’re also mindful of protecting the record so that defendants will be unsuccessful in attacking the verdict in post-trial motions or appeal.

What Our Clients Say