Gen Z jurors are driving big verdicts. And defense lawyers are swiping left

Mistrust of corporations and changes in jury dynamics have led to a surge in "nuclear verdicts" - jury awards exceeding $10 million - and spiraling insurance costs. Attorneys say the increasing number of jurors belonging to Generation Z may be a key reason why.

In September, a San Diego jury awarded $11.2 million to litigator David de Rubertis' client, a 74-year-old former employee of Octapharma Plasma Inc. who brought an age discrimination and failure to accommodate lawsuit. Roque v. Octapharma Plasma, Inc., 37-2021-00020936-CU-WT-CTL. (San Diego Super. Ct., filed May 11, 2021).

"Jurors in their 20s and 30s were critically important in driving that verdict," deRubertis said of the Octapharma Plasma case.

Two months later, a San Bernardino County jury awarded nearly $35 million to a Walmart commercial truck driver who claimed he was defamed when he was fired for driving an RV while on disability leave. Walmart called the verdict "outrageous" and said it did "not reflect the straightforward and uncontested facts" of the case. Fonseca v. Wal-Mart Associates Inc. et al., CIVDS1909501, (S.B. Super. Ct., filed Mar. 28, 2019).

"The Walmart case was the same deal," de Rubertis continued. "In the old days younger jurors would have worried me."

Most of deRubertis' cases are employment related. Whether these verdicts survive the post-trial process remains to be seen.

The "old days" were not that long ago. But a confluence of factors has led to jury pools that are more sympathetic to plaintiffs, more skeptical of defendants, with younger jurors wanting to do something they consider good, attorneys said.

A November 2024 report published by Allianz Commercial states that pharmaceuticals, food, and chemical products have become targets of billion-dollar class action litigation.

"Such upwards trends in social inflation are not sustainable for the long term, as the increasing costs from nuclear verdicts ultimately fall back on businesses, consumers and insurers," Joerg Ahrens, global head of key case management for long tail claims for Allianz Commercial, said in a statement.

Up to the pandemic, younger jurors in employment cases tended to be "badgers," deRubertis said. They were cynical toward plaintiffs rather than corporations.

But attitudes shifted during the pandemic, deRubertis continued. A "fractured" political environment has people feeling uneasy about economic, social and political issues was the reason, he said.

"Twenty, 30, 40 years ago people worked for one company. People wanted stability in an employment relationship," he noted.

"A lot of younger jurors don't feel that way. They live in a reality where they're not going to be homeowners with the economics nowadays. [So], there's a beautiful desire to do social good that wasn't there before," deRubertis said.

That shift in attitude has made defense attorney Robert Kum wary of jurors belonging to the Generation Z cohort, people born between the late 1990s and early 2010s. Kum is vice chair of the Products Liability and Toxic Torts Division of Duane Morris LLP's Trial Practice Group and frequently represents corporations against claims brought by consumers.

"Younger jurors tend to have a mistrust of companies. Going in, they assume corporate misconduct. they assume they've done something wrong. Older people in the jury pool tend to have more life experience. They understand that sometimes things just happen," Kum said.

"I'm very wary of putting Gen-Z on the jury," Kum continued. "If it comes down to two choices, all things equal, and I can pick a Gen-Z or a 70-year-old retiree, I'll pick the retiree."

The "fractured" political climate has empowered people to speak out and defer less to experts, Fell Law's founder Bibi Fell said. Fell specializes in catastrophic personal injury and wrongful death cases.

"People feel strongly about things they don't know a lot about," Fell said. "If you have a case and you can get a jury to feel strongly about it, they're going to award something astronomical and they're going to be unapologetic."

That willingness to speak up means there is more opportunity for attorneys to knock people off a jury if they believe they will be bad for the case, she noted.

But increased sympathy toward plaintiffs isn't isolated to just Gen Z. Harry Plotkin, a jury consultant who works with deRubertis and other plaintiff lawyers, said all age groups are awarding more money post-COVID.

"The trend had already slowly begun in 2018 but accelerated during COVID, when employees and customers and even corporate executives noticed companies making all kinds of selfish, disloyal financial decisions to make more money while cutting costs, payroll, and corners on safety," Plotkin said. "They saw layoffs when companies were still making profits, using COVID as an excuse. They saw companies cutting the quality of products using 'supply chain' excuses."