Conversation and concern around nuclear verdicts and legal-system abuse have been gaining momentum recently for an array of reasons including how the trends contribute to inflation and rising insurance costs. Recent reporting from Marathon Strategies brings the problem into view. The firm analyzed roughly 900 cases between 2009 and 2023 to determine the total worth of verdicts against corporate defendants along with the industries most commonly impacted and the states where such cases most often resulted in nuclear verdicts, or those valued at $10 million or more. Among the insights revealed by the data: |

• A total of $169 billion in corporate verdicts have been awarded since 2009.
• Juries in 286 different state and federal courts ordered a nuclear verdict.
• More than half of all corporate nuclear verdicts since the Great Recession originated in four states: Texas, Florida, California, and Pennsylvania.
• Juries have ordered nuclear verdicts against companies in more than 100 different industries including chemical production, oil & gas, telecommunication services, IT consulting and semiconductors manufacturing.

The slideshow above reveals the ten states with the highest jury verdicts between 2009 and 2023, according to Marathon Strategies. Researchers also looked at jury awards. The following were among the highest verdicts returned during the study's timeframe: |

• Estate of Johnson v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co. ($23.64 billion) — This was a wrongful death retrial in a lawsuit that was brought by the spouse of a deceased former smoker. The verdict was ultimately reversed, according to Jones Day.
• Allen v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc. ($9 billion) — Setting the stage for a class action, this verdict was awarded to individuals who argued the pharmaceutical company failed to appropriately warn the public about health risks associated with a Type 2 diabetes drug.
• Hopper v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA ($8.04 billion) — This verdict was awarded to the defendants in a case that looked at the reach of fiduciary duty.
• Murray v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ($8 billion) — The defendant in this case argued that he developed gynecomastia, or a condition in which female breast tissue grows in males, because of Janssen's drug, Risperdal.

See also: |

• How runaway verdicts contribute to inflation
• Strategies for enduring the financial haymakers of a nuclear verdict
• Navigating the complexities of nuclear verdicts in 2024