Fidelma L. Fitzpatrick

In addition to her toxic tort and medical casework, Fidelma also represents states, cities, counties and townships in litigation against opioid manufacturers, distributors and pharmacies in their claims the companies engaged in deceptive marketing and over-distribution of highly addictive opioids, creating and fueling the deadly opioid crisis.

In 2023, Honorable Mary Rowland appointed Fidelma as co-lead counsel for MDL 3060 In re: Hair Relaxer Marketing Sales Practices And Products Liability Litigation in the Northern District of Illinois. Plaintiffs in the MDL developed uterine cancer and other illnesses after using certain chemical hair relaxers. They assert defendant manufacturers failed to adequately test the products and warn customers about potential harms. Fidelma is also lead counsel of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for the coordinated Essure® litigation in California against Bayer Corp., and she serves on the PEC for Paragard® IUD multidistrict litigation filed in the Northern District of Georgia for women who suffered severe effects linked to the birth control devices. She also serves as co-lead counsel of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for a Philadelphia mass tort filed for farmers, railroad workers and others who developed Parkinson’s Disease after using Paraquat weed killer.

In 2012, Fidelma was appointed co-lead counsel of the pelvic mesh MDL In re American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation in the Southern District of West Virginia. She also holds leadership roles in pelvic mesh state court litigations, including serving as liaison counsel in the American Medical Systems cases consolidated in Delaware and the Boston Scientific cases consolidated in Massachusetts. She continues to represent women who experienced complications after receiving pelvic mesh/sling products. Filed cases are against defendants including Boston Scientific, C.R. Bard, Inc., and Ethicon.

In addition to her leadership appointments in various mass tort actions, Fidelma regularly serves as trial counsel in varied product liability and medical device cases on behalf of Plaintiffs. She was co-lead trial counsel in the lead paint pigment case, The People of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company et al., in which Motley Rice represented 10 California cities and counties against national lead paint pigment manufacturers. In January 2014, the court ruled Sherwin-Williams Company, NL Industries, Inc., and ConAgra Grocery Products Company created a public nuisance by actively promoting lead for use in homes despite knowing that it was highly toxic. The parties subsequently reached a $305 million settlement that established an abatement fund to remove toxic lead paint from homes and protect the health and safety of thousands of California children.

Fidelma also held a central role in the state of Rhode Island's trial against former corporate manufacturers of lead paint pigment. She continues to litigate cases seeking to hold the lead paint pigment industry accountable for the childhood lead poisoning crisis and provide restitution and compensation to affected children and families. As a result of her work for lead poisoning victims, the Wisconsin State Supreme Court became the first to recognize the legal rights of poisoned children to sue lead paint pigment manufacturers. 

Fidelma began working with Motley Rice attorneys in 1997 on the Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island lawsuits against the tobacco industry. She serves on the Board of Regents at Canisius College and frequently speaks on environmental and mass tort topics at conferences for federal and state court judges, attorneys, academic professionals and law students.

PUBLISHED WORKS:

“Painting Over Long-Standing Precedent: How the Rhode island Supreme Court Misapplied Public Nuisance Law in State v. Lead Industries Association” Roger Williams University Law Review (Summer 2010) 

“Access to Justice: The Use of Contingent Fee Arrangements by Public Officials to Vindicate Public Rights” Cardozo J.L. & Gender (Spring 2008)

“Negligence in the Paint: The Case for Applying the Risk Contribution Doctrine to Lead Litigation” in Pace Environmental Law Review (Fall 2008)

* Please remember that every case is different. Although it endorses this lawyer, The Legal 500 United States is not a Motley Rice client. Any result we achieve for one client in one matter does not necessarily indicate similar results can be obtained for other clients.