81°
The state Supreme Court has ordered that Lederman v. Prudential Life Ins. Co. of America be assigned to Superior Court Judge Brian Martinotti in Hackensack, a move the Totowa lawyer hopes will resolve an 8-year battle.
Given the number of plaintiffs and attorneys involved in the case, Roper argued that coordinated discovery and special masters would move things much faster than painstakingly taking each claim individually.
The decision could set a precedent for others of its kind.
Mass torts and consolidated management cases are associated more with claims that medical products are defective — in which case, everyone affected has shared an extremely similar experience — not with fraud, bribery, collusion, or discrimination.
They provide additional judicial resources, a specially trained staff and supervision by judges not bogged down by other cases.
The employees first filed suit eight years ago, claiming that Prudential basically bribed the law firm chosen to represent them, leading to a settlement far short of what the workers were entitled to.
In order to make their claim, the employees say, the court must compel the Newark-based insurance company to turn over documents it has so far withheld. These, the workers claim, will prove the Pru’s footsie-playing with the legal eagles.
Prudential has its own “dream team” of nearly three dozen lawyers. They contend that information is privileged.
The saga began in the late 90s, when employee Larry Lederman accused Prudential of redlining minorities. Originally, more than 350 employees joined Lederman in claiming similar pressure to discriminate.
They later agreed to confidential arbitration, a decision that would come back to haunt them. They hired Leeds, Morelli & Brown, agreeing to pay a third of whatever the court awarded.
Records show Prudential offered $10.5 million to settle confidentially, of which $500,000 was to go to Lederman. Keeping things quiet this way was good for the company’s image, critics and supporters alike agreed.
Weeks later, a former insurance agent said he was told that Prudential had quietly paid Leeds, Morelli $5 million up front, ostensibly for the employees’ legal fees.
To Lederman and others, the payment amounted to a bribe — claims Prudential called untrue.
An Essex County judge ordered Lederman’s suit sealed at the requests of Prudential and Leeds, Morelli, citing the original promise of confidentially but, more importantly, the potential embarrassment to Prudential and the law firm.
He even sealed his reasoning for sealing the decision, creating a Gordian legal knot that left several media organizations fighting to make the entire episode public.
Finally, in May 2006, a state appellate panel agreed with the media. The public image of a company — not even that of the mighty Pru — outweighs the public’s right to access, the judges said.
The case has pinballed among different courts and different judges, including one who’s now dead and another who’s retired. The Supremes, by virtue of their decision, have finally put it on the fast track.
This becomes only the third case ever in the state to get centralized management without being designated a mass tort. The first involved the drug Zelnorm, in September 2008, which Martinotti is also handling. Then came litigation against Stryker Trident over hip implants last April.
Click here to follow Daily Voice Hackensack and receive free news updates.
