DiCello Levitt has expanded its mass tort practice with the addition of attorney David Middleman, a move that signals the firm’s intent to deepen its bench in one of the most active areas of civil litigation. Middleman joins a plaintiffs’ firm already known for high-profile work in class actions, mass torts, and catastrophic injury cases, and his arrival adds experienced trial and case-management capacity at a moment when mass tort filings nationwide continue to climb. For claimants, this kind of hire matters more than it might first appear.
Mass tort dockets — think of litigation like the Camp Lejeune water contamination claims, where hundreds of thousands of administrative claims were filed after the 2022 Honoring Our PACT Act opened the door — require firms to manage enormous caseloads without losing track of individual clients. Firms that staff up with seasoned mass tort lawyers are generally better positioned to push cases toward trial rather than settling early for less. Middleman’s addition fits a broader pattern of plaintiffs’ firms building dedicated teams to handle multidistrict litigation (MDL) at scale.
Table of Contents
- Why Is DiCello Levitt Growing Its Mass Tort Team With David Middleman?
- What David Middleman Brings to a Mass Tort Practice
- DiCello Levitt’s Track Record in Mass Torts and Class Actions
- What a Growing Mass Tort Team Means for Current and Prospective Claimants
- How Lateral Hires Shape MDL Leadership and Bellwether Trials
- The Broader Trend of Plaintiffs’ Firm Expansion in Mass Torts
- How to Verify a Firm’s Mass Tort Credentials
- Frequently Asked Questions
Why Is DiCello Levitt Growing Its Mass Tort Team With David Middleman?
The simplest answer is volume and complexity. The federal MDL system currently concentrates a large majority of all pending federal civil cases into a relatively small number of consolidated proceedings — products liability matters like talc, Roundup, hair relaxers, and Suboxone film litigation each involve thousands to tens of thousands of plaintiffs. A firm that wants leadership appointments in these proceedings, where steering committees control strategy and common-benefit work, needs attorneys with the credentials and bandwidth to earn them. Adding a lawyer like Middleman is how firms compete for those roles.
There is also a strategic comparison worth drawing. Some plaintiffs’ firms operate primarily as case aggregators — they advertise heavily, sign up large inventories of claimants, and then refer cases to litigating firms in exchange for fee shares. DiCello Levitt has positioned itself on the other end of that spectrum: a trial-focused firm that takes cases to verdict. Hires in the mass tort group reinforce that identity, because trying bellwether cases requires depth that referral-model firms simply do not maintain in-house.
What David Middleman Brings to a Mass Tort Practice
Lateral hires in mass tort practices are typically valued for one of three things: trial experience, scientific and expert-witness fluency, or MDL leadership history. Mass tort cases live and die on general causation — proving that a product or exposure can cause the alleged injury — which means attorneys must work closely with epidemiologists, toxicologists, and regulatory experts. An attorney who has been through Daubert challenges, where courts decide whether expert testimony is admissible, is worth considerably more to a firm than one who has only handled intake and settlement administration.
A note of caution for readers evaluating firms: a press release about a new hire is not, by itself, evidence that a firm will perform well on your specific case. Law firm growth announcements are partly marketing. Claimants should still ask concrete questions — who will actually handle my file, has the firm tried cases in this litigation, and does it hold any leadership appointments in the relevant MDL — rather than relying on headcount as a proxy for quality.
DiCello Levitt’s Track Record in Mass Torts and Class Actions
DiCello Levitt, founded by Mark DiCello and Adam Levitt, has built a national reputation across several litigation categories. The firm has held leadership roles in major consumer class actions and product defect cases, and it was among the firms appointed to leadership in the litigation arising from the East Palestine, Ohio train derailment, which produced a $600 million class settlement with Norfolk Southern in 2024. That case illustrates the kind of work the firm’s mass tort and environmental teams handle: large affected populations, contested causation science, and a defendant with substantial resources.
The firm has also been active in personal injury and catastrophic injury dockets, areas that overlap heavily with mass torts. The distinction matters: a class action resolves many identical claims in a single judgment, while a mass tort treats each plaintiff’s injury individually even when cases are consolidated for pretrial purposes. Firms that handle both, as DiCello Levitt does, can route a client’s claim into whichever structure fits the facts.
What a Growing Mass Tort Team Means for Current and Prospective Claimants
For people with pending or potential claims, a firm’s expansion cuts two ways. The upside is capacity: more attorneys generally means faster workup of individual cases, more resources for expert development, and a stronger position in settlement negotiations. Defendants track which firms are willing and able to try cases, and inventory held by trial-ready firms historically commands better settlement values than inventory held by firms known to settle wholesale.
The tradeoff is attention. Rapidly growing mass tort practices sometimes sign more cases than their new headcount can service, and clients can find themselves communicating mostly with case managers rather than attorneys. Before signing a retainer, claimants should ask how many cases the firm holds in the specific litigation, whether the firm intends to work the cases itself or co-counsel them out, and what the expected communication cadence is. A 40% contingency fee buys very different service at different firms, even when the percentage is identical.
How Lateral Hires Shape MDL Leadership and Bellwether Trials
MDL judges appoint plaintiffs’ leadership — lead counsel, executive committees, and steering committees — based on experience, cooperation history, and the resources a firm can commit. Lateral hires with established MDL résumés can directly improve a firm’s standing in these appointments. Leadership matters because steering committees select bellwether cases, negotiate global settlements, and earn common-benefit fees, typically assessed as a percentage holdback on all settlements in the litigation.
The limitation claimants should understand: leadership appointments benefit the litigation as a whole, but they do not guarantee your individual case gets tried or settled quickly. In the 3M Combat Arms earplug litigation, the largest MDL in U.S. history with roughly 260,000 claims, even a $6 billion settlement reached in 2023 took years of bellwether trials to produce — and individual payouts varied enormously based on injury tier. Firm prestige speeds nothing up for a claimant whose medical records are incomplete or whose injury falls into a low-value category.
The Broader Trend of Plaintiffs’ Firm Expansion in Mass Torts
DiCello Levitt’s hire is part of an industry-wide arms race. Litigation finance has poured billions of dollars into the plaintiffs’ bar over the past decade, allowing firms to fund expensive expert work and carry cases for years before any recovery. As litigations like Roundup — where Bayer has set aside more than $16 billion for settlements and verdicts — demonstrate the financial scale of modern mass torts, firms have responded by hiring laterally from competitors and from the defense bar to build specialized teams in talc, PFAS, medical devices, and pharmaceutical injuries.
How to Verify a Firm’s Mass Tort Credentials
Claimants can independently check most of what a firm claims. Federal MDL leadership appointments are public: the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation lists all pending MDLs at jpml.uscourts.gov, and case management orders naming leadership are available on PACER.
State bar websites confirm an attorney’s license status and disciplinary history. Verdict databases and court dockets show whether a firm has actually tried cases to judgment in a given litigation — a far more reliable indicator than website biographies or press announcements.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is DiCello Levitt known for?
It is a national plaintiffs’ firm handling class actions, mass torts, and catastrophic injury cases, with leadership roles in matters like the East Palestine derailment litigation.
What does a mass tort attorney do?
Mass tort attorneys represent individual plaintiffs injured by the same product or exposure, managing cases consolidated in MDLs while preserving each client’s individual claim.
How is a mass tort different from a class action?
A class action resolves identical claims in one judgment; a mass tort keeps each plaintiff’s case individual, with damages tied to each person’s specific injuries.
Does a firm’s size affect my settlement?
It can. Trial-ready firms with MDL leadership roles often negotiate stronger settlements, but individual payouts still depend on your injury severity and documentation.
How can I check a law firm’s mass tort experience?
Search the JPML’s pending MDL list, review leadership orders on PACER, and confirm attorney standing through state bar websites.