Maryland Shows Why Product Liability and Toxic Tort Plans Matter

In a two-year span, MAryland had to deal with a pair of massive infrastructure failures: the sudden Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse and the Potomac Interceptor sewage spill.

For national counsel, both incidents echo familiar truths in product liability and toxic tort work. Unexpected events happen, but we’re in the business of making sure that predictable risks are prepared for and never ignored.

The 2024 bridge collapse will cost billions of dollars in economic impact and repairs. As a products liability lawyer, the National Transportation Safety Board’s finding stood out: A single loose wire aboard the Dali (the ship that made contact with the bridge) was cited as a significant contributing cause.

In January, a failed section of sewer line in Montgomery County has turned into one of the largest sewage spills in US history. The system, built in the 1960s, was slated for more than $600 million in repairs that didn’t take place before the failure. No loose wire here, just a 60+ year-old pipe that collapsed before funds were deployed—unfortunate but not unexpected.

Product liability cases continue to be a significant driver of filings, and the products at issue are expanding. Legacy exposures (such as asbestos) persist, while products such as PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), lithium-ion battery concerns, and GLP-1/weight loss drugs expand the litigation map. Plaintiff advertising and social media accelerate client intake, which means more filings.

What Is Expected

Bigger verdicts, inflation, litigation funding, and disappearing codefendants (whether through insolvency or coverage deterioration) mean dollar settlement ranges trend higher than “traditional” value anchors.

With these ongoing pressures, what approaches and advice can create more clarity with these dynamics? While naturally recognizing that one size will never fit all, and that counsel often wear different hats, here’s a simple, uniform playbook that works across roles.

National counsel should:

• Pass on client expectations to regional counsel for a unified and coordinated strategy. For example, is the client risk-averse or ready for trial? Does the client wish to avoid extended discovery periods?
• Develop themes proactively for defending cases with an eye to trial readiness and consistency. This permits flexibility as unique facts develop and helps maintain a consistent story for the company and the products at issue.
• Formulate standardized reporting templates so that the unusual can be highlighted and addressed (a “red flag” procedure). These should be short documents that include demographics, trial dates, and testimony summaries.
• Maintain relationships with subject-matter experts and work closely with those who may be called to testify and defend these products.
• Ensure consistent discovery responses and witness preparation. Maintain historical responses and use them as a template for future responses whenever possible.
• Catalog nationwide trends through relationships with regional counsel to ensure nuanced insights and the ability to anticipate with precision. This includes filing statistics, verdict trends, and outcomes in similar litigation for other products.
• Build transparency with insurance carriers through early and consistent communication. The carriers need to weigh risk like the other stakeholders.

Regional counsel should:

• Report on all matters in a timely, accurate, and frank manner. They are the source of truth for their cases and are the first line of defense to avoid surprises.
• Balance regional procedural requirements with national defense strategy, making sure that national strategy doesn’t run afoul of case deadlines or required filing formats.
• Avoid unnecessary surprises at all costs, including trial dates, urgent discovery, or authority needs.

Interactions with in-house counsel should:

• Avoid information silos and ensure necessary data is delivered in a useful manner (dashboards or other shared platforms). No one person should have important data in their head or only stored locally.
• Convey risk assessments clearly, including early evaluations and significant case updates. In-house counsel depend on us to report to their business units and convey risks.
• Know the various audiences to craft sound strategies. Much of what gets reported by in-house counsel will be read by executives who may not know the buzzwords of product liability/toxic tort defense that we take for granted.

The collapse of a bridge and the crumbling of a sewer pipe from Maryland can serve as reminders. Every surprise can’t be predicted, but there should be no surprises with the predictable.

In 2026, the plan should be straightforward: Align early, report clearly, and stay ready. The fewer unknowns that are tolerated, the fewer “unexpected” hits that legal matters—and budgets—will take.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc., the publisher of Bloomberg Law, Bloomberg Tax, and Bloomberg Government, or its owners.

Author Information

Jay Evans is a shareholder at Segal McCambridge in Pittsburgh.

Write for Us: Author Guidelines