About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


102 Tex. L. Rev. Online 1 (2023)

handle is hein.journals/seealtex102 and id is 1 raw text is: Distorting the Purposes of Multidistrict Litigation: Reflections on Noll and Zimmerman Deborah Hensler* The January 2023 Texas Law symposium on multidistrict litigation (MDLs) brought together an amazing group of scholars, whose papers and commentary encompassed empirical inquiry on the uses of MDLs in federal complex litigation, policy analysis, and normative discussion. Together these papers con- stitute an important contribution to the literature on approaches to resolving large-scale mass litigation. I was asked to comment on David Noll and Adam Zimmerman's paper on judicial ap- pointments to MDL leadership committees.1 The composition of these committees has increasingly pro- voked controversy in the academy and among practitioners and led to calls to diversify both judicial appointments of MDL trans- feree judges and judges' appointments of lawyers to Plaintiff Steering Committees.2 However, to date there has been little systematic evidence on the extent or lack of such diversity. Noll and Zimmerman's paper goes a good ways toward filling this gap, a fact that I applauded in my oral comments at the sympo- sium. Generally, their work supports the assertion that MDL leadership has been homogeneous with regard to gender, race * Judge John W. Ford Professor of Dispute Resolution, Stanford Law School. 1. See David L. Noll & Adam S. Zimmerman, Diversity and Complexity in MDL Leadership: A Status Report from Case Management Orders, 101 TEXAS L. REV. 1679 (2023). 2. See id. at 1685-86, 1685 n.29 (summarizing the debate and providing examples of academic and practitioner critiques). 1