State Attorneys General

State Attorneys General

Some state attorneys general have become increasingly overreaching in recent years, initiating crusades against one industry after another, and often working in tandem with personal injury lawyers “deputized” to file lawsuits on behalf of state government.

An Expanding, Politicized Role

Certain state attorneys general are operating in a competitive and politically charged environment, where “activism” is the norm and generating media headlines as a “crusader” is an ever-present goal. Much like activist judges whose decisions create new laws and expand lawsuit rules, some attorneys general have been aggressively investigating and filing lawsuits in areas where they previously had not been involved or which traditionally fell within the province of federal authority.

This trend accelerated after the tobacco lawsuits of the 1990’s generated significant state revenue as well as huge profits for certain plaintiffs’ lawyers. Other major state attorney general initiatives have included lawsuits against manufacturers, utilities, software companies and financial services, among others.

Issue Resources: State Attorneys General

Testimony of Bill McCollum Before the House Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on "Contingent Fees and Conflicts of Interest in State AG Enforcement of Federal Law"

On February 2, 2012, the Honorable Bill McCollum testified on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform before the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution hearing on "Contingent Fees and Conflicts of Interest in State AG Enforcement of Federal Law." LEARN MORE »

Source: U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform
Released: Feb 03, 2012

Trends in Litigation

Watch Now

The business community needs to be aware of the latest trends in litigation. So what are they? At the 12th Annual Legal Reform Summit on October 26, 2011, we posed that question to several key practitioners. This brief 3-minute video includes the responses of John H. Beisner, Practice Co-Leader, Mass Torts/Insurance Litigation Practice Area, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP; The Honorable Thurbert E. Baker, Former Attorney General of Georgia, and Partner, McKenna Long & Aldridge; Katherine L. Adams, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Honeywell International, Inc.; and Lisa S. Blatt, Partner, Arnold & Porter LLP.

Source: U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform
Released: Jan 20, 2012

About the Panel: Trial Bar Trends We Don't Want to Continue

Watch Now

At the 12th Annual Legal Reform Summit on October 26, 2011, Katherine L. Adams, the Senior Vice President and General Counsel at Honeywell International, Inc., took part in a panel discussion entitled "Trends We Don't Want To Continue: A Look at the Latest Lawsuits and Theories from The Trial Bar." In this video, she provides an overview of the panel discussion.

Source: U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform
Released: Dec 16, 2011

Trends We Don’t Want To Continue: A Look at the Latest Lawsuits and Theories from The Trial Bar

Watch Now

This panel at the 12th Annual Legal Reform Summit on October 26, 2011 spotlighted litigation trends in a variety of areas such as asbestos and the use of civil conspiracy, transnational torts, and the use of outside contingency fee counsel by certain state attorneys general in recent litigation.

Source: U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform
Released: Oct 26, 2011

Getting our Financial House in Order: the Role of Attorneys General in Financial Services

Watch Now

This 2010 Legal Reform Summit panel examined the sweeping new Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and its inclusion of enhanced enforcement powers for the state attorneys general.

Source: Institute for Legal Reform
Released: Oct 26, 2010

The Rise and Fall of Lead Paint Litigation in Ohio

Source: The Federalist Society | Released: May 18, 2009

State Court Docket Watch Spring 2009

Source: The Federalist Society | Released: Mar 19, 2009

Letter in opposition to provision in H.R. 1105, the 'Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009,' sent to the U.S. Senate

Source: Institute for Legal Reform | Released: Feb 27, 2009

Beyond Due Process - A Litigation Primer: Challenging Attorney General and Other Government Contingency Fee Arrangements

Defendants in government contingency fee lawsuits should consider a variety of non-due process “bright line” challenges to contingency fee arrangements. These include challenges based on the government’s control or lack of control of the case and whether it was brought and is being litigated in the public interest; as well as challenges based on state separation of powers provisions, government contracting laws, and laws pertaining to government employment of outside counsel. This paper highlights these challenges as well as the limitations of certain of these challenges in qui tam suits, which have been brought by private plaintiffs’ attorneys to circumvent the legal and policy issues associated with more traditional government contingency fee arrangements.

Source: Institute for Legal Reform
Released: Jan 31, 2009

Letter in opposition to HIPAA provision in H.R. 1, the 'American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,' sent to the U.S. Senate

Source: Institute for Legal Reform | Released: Jan 30, 2009

More research from State Attorneys General »