A federal judge issued a Hagens Berman Referral to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) after expressing deep concerns about the firm’s conduct in long-running thalidomide lawsuits. The referral requests a criminal investigation into Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, its managing partner Steve Berman, and former partner Tyler Weaver.
These concerns grew out of litigation involving claims that thalidomide caused severe birth defects. Although the cases began in 2011, new findings convinced the judge that the issues extend far beyond normal procedural mistakes.
Judge Details Misconduct Behind the Hagens Berman Referral
U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond issued the referral after reviewing a special master’s report. He described the firm’s conduct as “shocking” and said it “approached the criminal,” which signaled the seriousness of the concerns.
Beyond that, the judge observed that many complaints lacked adequate factual support. He further noted that several claims appeared to have been filed with little investigation. Consequently, the court expanded its scrutiny, especially as many
cases were dismissed on statute-of-limitations grounds.
Special Master’s Findings That Led to the Hagens Berman Referral
Judge Diamond appointed attorney William Hangley as special master in 2015 to evaluate the legitimacy of the thalidomide claims. Over several years, Hangley examined the firm’s evidence, expert reports, and client screening methods. His review resulted in a detailed report issued in October 2023.
The report identified several problems, including that the firm:
- failed to vet clients’ medical histories
- filed claims without sufficient factual support
- interfered with discovery
- attempted to withdraw when sanctions appeared likely
- allowed Weaver to alter a draft expert report
Although Hangley recommended sanctions, he stopped short of suggesting a criminal referral. Nevertheless, Judge Diamond determined that the findings warranted federal attention and, in turn, made the Hagens Berman Referral official on December 2.
Firm’s Response to Allegations
Hagens Berman strongly disputes the allegations. Its outside counsel described the referral as confusing and unsupported, while arguing that it misinterprets the litigation record.
In response, the firm maintains that it had reasonable grounds to bring the thalidomide claims. It also insists that it had no intent to mislead the court, no expectation of sanctions, and no indication that a criminal inquiry was possible. Moreover, the
firm argues that losing a case does not amount to misconduct and emphasizes that it acted in good faith on behalf of clients who believed the drug caused harm.
Broader Impact on Mass-Tort Litigation
The referral has sparked renewed conversation throughout the mass-tort field. On one hand, defendants often argue that some firms file cases with inadequate investigation. On the other hand, plaintiffs’ lawyers counter that complex scientific claims
require extensive discovery before evidence becomes clear.
Even so, a judge referring a civil matter for potential criminal review is unusually rare. Because of that, the move may influence how other firms approach client screening, claim evaluation, and expert testimony in
large-scale litigation.
Background on the Thalidomide Lawsuits
The dispute centers on
Glenda Johnson et al. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. et al., filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Case No. 2:11-cv-05782-PD). The litigation targeted major pharmaceutical companies, including Sanofi, GSK, and Grünenthal.
Thalidomide became notorious in the mid-20th century after thousands of children worldwide developed severe birth defects linked to the drug. As a result, the case carried significant historical and emotional weight throughout its proceedings.
Next Steps in the Process
Although the DOJ is not required to act on the judge’s referral, the strong language in the order increases the likelihood of a preliminary review. If prosecutors move forward, the case could become one of the
rare mass-tort matters examined for potential criminal exposure.
At this stage, Hagens Berman continues to deny wrongdoing and intends to defend its conduct as the situation progresses.
Looking to advance your legal career? Explore thousands of verified attorney jobs on
LawCrossing and apply today. Discover opportunities that match your skills, goals, and experience — start your search now!
The post
DOJ Action Follows Hagens Berman Referral first appeared on
JDJournal Blog.
