Why Food and Drug Disputes Are Not Suited to Litigation

Why Food and Drug Disputes Are Not Suited to Litigation

Consumers often hear about contentious issues involving food or drug products. Items may be recalled or may be alleged to cause harm though the manufacturer refuses to issue a recall. Class action lawsuits may be formed after adverse side effects are realized from the use of certain products. However, these disputes often cause negative ramifications for both parties of the litigation.

For plaintiffs, the more claimants that form the class dilute the overall award that each individual plaintiff stands to recover. The longer litigation drags on, the more legal fees and costs are incurred so that if the case does eventually settle or is resolved at trial, the more the lawyers make in the process and the less the individual claimants receive in the form of compensation for damages. Food and drug manufacturers are often aware that they have greater leverage in these disputes than the claimants. They may intentionally make litigation drag on while regular people who have medical expenses and other damages from the effects of food or drug products continue to suffer.

For defendants, food and drug issues often create negative publicity for manufacturers. Their public image may suffer if they are perceived by the public as not caring about consumers’ health or safety. The value of their stock may plummet as national coverage of the recall or dispute is provided to the matter. Manufacturers may face ongoing legal expenses that can easily amount to hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars before the case is resolved.

Alternative dispute resolution options like mediation and arbitration minimize the risk for both parties. They give them more decision-making authority during the process, rather than moving the parties toward an uncertain outcome due to decisions made by a judge or jury.

Share on Social Media

MEDIATOR OF THE MONTH: Jeffrey Grayson
Why Food and Drug Disputes Are Not Suited to Litigation