Sindhu Daniel on Mass Torts and Mentorship

This transcript of Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR was generated using AI transcription and lightly edited for readability. It may contain errors, and speaker labels are approximate. The audio recording is the authoritative version.

Welcome to Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR, the podcast where we elevate the stories of the plaintiff's bar and dive into the key trends shaping the civil justice system today. I'm your host, Ray DeLorenzi, and in each episode, we'll bring you insightful interviews with leading attorneys, expert perspectives on current legal events, and in-depth discussions on the issues that matter most. Now, let's jump in.

And one thing that I really try to learn is to be really giving of the opportunities that come my way. I think when you are this female person of color, who's really struggled and done everything they can to get opportunities, it's really important for me to also make sure that I share those opportunities and give opportunities to other people.

Ray: Hey everyone, welcome to a new episode of Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR. I'm your host, Ray DeLorenzi, and today I'm honored to be joined by Sindhu Daniel, a partner with Scott and Scott, who just joined the firm recently, so she'll be able to talk about her new adventure there. But she has spent a couple of decades working in mass torts, working on some of the most — I was going to say notorious, but I guess most well-known — cases. Notorious in a good way, I think, in which Sindhu has become one of the best and most well-regarded litigators in the mass tort bar. So, Sindhu, thanks so much for joining us today.

Sindhu: Thank you guys for having me.

Ray: You know, I always start with these — just get to know the person behind the case. Your name has appeared a few times on leadership appointments, but I think folks who listen to this want to get to know who you are. And doing some research ahead of this, I know you're a child of immigrants, and I'm just curious about your upbringing and what drove you to the law.

Sindhu: You know, I think it's nothing very exciting, but in terms of being here — my parents came in 1971, and my sister and I, we were with them. We were babies, and we came with $200. And that's not any kind of made-up number, that's the truth. And I think when you come from very, very humble beginnings and you're really just pushing yourself, trying to understand America at that time, we were always pushed to succeed and get jobs that could really support our families, because that was the most important thing.

So my dad kind of gave me three options of what I could do. One was a doctor, an attorney, and an engineer — I wouldn't have succeeded as a doctor or an engineer, but I picked law, and I think it ended up being the right decision for me. I certainly think the financial aspects of the law had a lot to do with why I became an attorney. And my parents told me I had a big mouth, so that certainly helped. I wasn't shy, and I was able to speak eloquently back then, so they thought this was the right fit for me. But certainly the financial aspects of it. And what's helped so much is really the flexibility of it. You can do so much with a law degree, and I think that's really important for people to know in this day and age.

Ray: So how old were you when you came to the States?

Sindhu: One. One year old. Yeah. So, I mean, I'm certainly an immigrant, but I'm more American than most people.

Ray: The reason I ask is about your upbringing — because you said they came with $200 in their pocket. And you deal with clients who have gone through something very traumatic and are often going through financial difficulties due to an injury they have. I just wonder if any of that experience growing up has translated into representing people who are going through a different type of harrowing or scary circumstance.

Sindhu: Yeah, and I think that is everything as to why I do what I do in terms of helping plaintiffs, right? We needed so much help when we came, and we didn't have it. There was no parachute for my parents, or for us — my sister and I growing up. There was nothing to fall back on. And I understand where my plaintiffs are, most of them. My plaintiffs are not wealthy people by any means, and they're not sophisticated, which also reminds me of my parents. While they were educated, coming to America and learning the language and how it's spoken here is very different.

So just learning and understanding that people are coming from situations that are very difficult financially — I get it when they're calling us a lot, wondering when their payments are going to come. I also understand this is the most important thing to them. Keeping that in mind, everything has to do with my upbringing, why I have been able to succeed in this job — just the hardworking nature you need to succeed, the empathy you have to have for these clients. If you come from a background of extreme wealth and privilege, it's very hard to understand where they're coming from. And I definitely didn't come from that. I absolutely understand what it feels like when $10,000 means a lot. I also know what it's like to get a million dollars and know what that feels like.

So understanding that entire range of what people are going through is really important in our jobs — to remember that this is, many times, their only lawsuit they've ever been a part of. They're not sophisticated in it. They have a lot of questions, a lot of concerns. They may not understand how it's going to affect their lives in terms of Medicaid, Medicare, all of those things. But I certainly do. And in any case that I'm a part of, I make sure that our staff is really educated in understanding that about our plaintiffs.

Ray: When you went to law school, did you know immediately, like, serving people who have been injured is what I want to do? Or was there a moment — whether it was law school or afterward — where it sort of clicked for you and came together?

Sindhu: You know, I think in my head I wanted to be this glamorous, TV type of attorney. In my head, I wanted to be on trial. I think you don't really know all of the different positions that are available in law firms, in the plaintiff's bar, the defense bar, anything. It's probably a lot better since I've been to law school in terms of getting more career information out there to students. But I really was thinking, when I left law school, I would just be doing litigation, and I'd be in a defender's office or a DA's office — which I did an internship there — where I'd be doing these trials all the time, and then going into private practice and doing depositions and trials.

And then I realized — it was really my boss at the time, Chris Seeger, who was able to explain to me that you have to do what you're good at, as opposed to what your head thinks you're supposed to do, right? And in finding what you're really good at — he told me, you're super organized, you're great at managing people, you're great at managing cases, great at data, all of those things. And that really became my specialty, whether I wanted that or not. It's a bit of advice I give to younger people now: it's really not focusing so much on what you think you're supposed to do, as opposed to finding what you're really good at. And if you love that — which I really do — it becomes part of who I am. So that's kind of how I started doing plaintiff's work.

I also had a child in 1998, and I decided to go back to work. And I think what a lot of this audience may not remember — there was something called a newspaper that you had to look through for a want ad. There are no filters on it, so there's no way to Excel-spreadsheet-filter for these types of jobs. You actually had to look through the whole thing. And so I looked through the newspaper and saw an advertisement for something that was three to six months. And I thought, okay — I had just become a new mom, and I have a developmentally delayed child. One of my children is developmentally delayed.

So I wasn't sure that I would go back to work full-time after she was born, but I also realized I wasn't the person who should be staying at home. When you have a developmentally delayed child and you're waiting for them to do something, it's like watching water boil, right? It never boils if you're watching it. So the same way, I knew it was probably best for her and my family if I tried to go back to work. And I did, and that happened to be with Seeger Weiss, and then I stayed there for 17 years. It became everything that I knew. But that's really how it all started in terms of the plaintiff's bar.

Ray: So I'm curious about mentors in your legal career. Who has stood out for you — maybe let's say two or three people — that, particularly as someone who became a mother and wanted to re-enter the workforce, really helped guide you and grow your career?

Sindhu: Yeah, so countless women have been so good to me in terms of providing me with opportunities, with absolutely nothing asked of me in return, right? But I will say the men who have owned the firms that I have worked for have been amazing to me. Without them and their help and their belief in me, it would not have happened. And Chris Seeger is really one of them. He's probably the first person that I worked for in that capacity, and I became the first partner woman of color there. And it was never recognized — and I don't say that in a negative way at all. I got it on merit. He didn't see me as a woman, he didn't see me as an Indian woman, he just saw me as Sindhu, and somebody who accomplished what he wanted to accomplish, and made me into a partner. So I say that he's definitely a mentor. He taught me so much about what I know about how to run mass torts.

And certainly Russell Budd. People like him have epitomized what it is to be mass tort attorneys and succeed. Both of them really recognized me for the work — nothing that I go around talking about, being a woman, being a woman of color, right? That wasn't important to them. It was really about succeeding. But countless women — countless women. Jayne Conroy certainly had given me a lot of opportunities that I didn't ask for, nor did I necessarily want. Even something as simple as — we were at a conference, certainly in the beginning of my career, and she just had come to dinner. And as a woman and a mother, certainly in the beginning, you kind of just want to relax in the evening and go to your room, order room service, all of those things. But she kind of taught me that the deals really happen at those dinners, right? And it's those relationships that you form with real people that help you really get ahead in this business.

And not just get ahead — it's about getting information, it's about providing information to other people. It can't be a one-way street. Lori Andrus always puts me forward for things. She's really the epitome of what the plaintiff's bar should always be. She does so much. She walks the walk, she talks the talk. I'm just somebody who does a lot of talking, and I probably need to do a lot more than that. But those two definitely come to mind. There are countless people, honestly, that have been mentors to me. I've been so lucky. And I hope that I eventually become a mentor to somebody else.

Ray: What are the lessons — and I think you're understating the fact about you becoming a mentor to others — what are the lessons? When you see, let's say, a young associate at a firm, whether they're a colleague or at a different firm, what are the lessons that you learned early on in your career that you try to impart on them?

Sindhu: Right. Well, one is definitely get out there, right? Get out there. Fear — fear of doing things, fear of being a bit embarrassed — I really try to not allow fear to stop me from doing things. I tell associates all the time, and even junior partners, that I don't say no to a lot, right? I really try to do everything that I can to get out there, to learn more. I still attend webinars, and I tell people all the time, even if I'm not in that litigation — I may not be part of a class action, but I'm always trying to learn more. Even at 54, doing this for over 25 years, I'm always trying to keep learning, and I really impart that to our associates. There's always an opportunity. You learn something from every conference I have attended. You learn these little bits and pieces that you take with you.

I think for me, even, I continue to learn. And one thing that I really try to learn is to be really giving of the opportunities that come my way. I think when you are this female person of color who's really struggled and done everything they can to get opportunities, it's really important for me to also make sure that I share those opportunities and give opportunities to other people. I struggle with it all the time, like, I've got to go, go, go, go, and take, take, take, take, and do this. And I want to make sure that I give other people the opportunity to shine.

But really — like I said, just not going back to your room when you're tired. And those conferences, I've seen you at all of them. You see me. We're running around. Part of that is really building those relationships. Whether you're on the West Coast — I live in New Jersey — so there are times I'm up for 23 hours straight, right? I leave my house at 3 a.m. and I'm going to bed at 2 a.m. in Las Vegas. You're up, but you're building those relationships. It's about really getting to know the people out there, because that's building those relationships and letting people know what it is that I do, what I can do well, and what I can provide. That's why hopefully people remember, oh, hey, when we're doing leadership, let's have Sindhu on this, because she did this case with us.

So really, I try to remind people: don't say no to a lot. You're like, oh, I don't have experience. I didn't have experience in a lot of things. But I have come to learn that I'm smart enough to learn it, and the associates that we hire, they're smart people, and you will learn it. A lot of it is trial by fire. And the things that I have been appointed to — it happened to do probably with the firm that I was with. In the beginning, I was appointed to privilege logs. I didn't know anything about privilege logs. And through the years, I have come to become this person who gets to chair these privilege log committees. And it's because of not knowing anything in the beginning, but having a great co-chair who taught me so much, and I was a sponge, and I was willing to be humble enough to say I literally don't know what I'm talking about. And then you learn, after years and years of doing this. So I hope that the experience they learn is, just don't say no, try it. What's the worst that's going to happen to you?

RebuttalPR is a strategic communications firm that works exclusively with the plaintiff's bar to market their firms and win high-stakes litigation. For more than 15 years, the nation's leading plaintiff law firms have turned to RebuttalPR to create winning communications campaigns, ranging from billion-dollar mass torts and class actions to positioning attorneys in their markets to grow their businesses and make a bigger impact. What sets RebuttalPR apart is the unique skill set of our team, which combines legal knowledge with public relations expertise. Our team's ability to understand the facts and law of a case, as well as the media landscape, means we can develop compelling, narrative-driven campaigns that resonate with key stakeholders and support your firm and legal strategy. Visit our website, rebuttalpr.com, to learn more. Now, back to our episode.

Ray: Again, we're joined here by Sindhu Daniel with Scott and Scott. Sindhu, I want to take a little bit of a detour and talk about the first mass tort you handled. You have lawyers all the time wanting to potentially do that type of work, but it can be overwhelming. And I'm curious how you — what was the first case like that you worked on, and what was that experience like in your career, trying to grapple with all the problems and knots that come along with major litigation like that?

Sindhu: I think my — what I refer to as my third child, because I have two living human children — it was Vioxx, right? And that was a long time ago, but that was a beast. It's the first time where it was really such a large litigation. Seeger Weiss at the time — I was there, and we were really in the forefront of the litigation. And so managing not just our internal cases, but so many other people's cases and committees and different litigations all around the country — I think that was really probably the biggest litigation. And realizing that this case, and this type of work, is not for people who are not willing to put in a lot of time — me and my team. And that's the beauty of this. I'm just one person, but I have always had this great team behind me, and that includes associates, partners, paralegals, law clerks — you name it. Everybody is such an important aspect of that. But we stayed up countless nights on that litigation.

And it formed the best relationships, too. But I think Vioxx certainly is the first case where I realized that this affects every single part of your life — professionally, personally. So these cases not only end up being great for clients who settle — and it's the first time I also received a gift from a client. It was a $10 Dunkin' Donuts gift card, but it meant so much to me. You really see the effect that you have on people directly. And so in those times you realize, oh, you make a difference in somebody's life who really didn't have a lot. And to them, that small token that we were able to get for them meant everything. And I never forget that. It's actually in my purse today.

Ray: What are the biggest lessons you learned from Vioxx? And it could even be things you think back on, like, oh, we could have done better, that you've imparted in future cases that you've had an opportunity to work on?

Sindhu: I think it's really just about organization, and the level of organization that is required in cases like that. It's also kind of never taking no from the defendant, right? Realizing you've got to keep pushing for these clients and making it clear to them what these injuries really are. Learning not to take somebody else's narrative and just believe it wholeheartedly, when you know — through the science, through the development, through the clients, right? Because it's people who lie. Statistics and data don't lie. And so being able to use that information — that is really where I learned that that is the most important aspect of every case.

Because I'm not a trial attorney by any means. I'm not somebody who — if I'm first-chairing a trial, things have gone horribly wrong. So that's just not my area of expertise after this many years. But I do know the data. What I do is settle, right? And most of these cases settle. And so the data that is important — that's what we were able to call out in Vioxx. It made it such a great settlement. Obviously the people in charge of getting that settlement done had everything to do with it, but that data that we were able to provide was really the reason why those cases were able to settle in the way they did.

Ray: When you're looking to resolve a case — particularly now, you have the threat of defendants filing for bankruptcy — how do you, what's the, not the math calculus, but the subjective calculus of, how do we get enough without pushing too far? And what is enough? What are the permutations that go through your head when you're trying to design justice for your clients, but within the confines of the civil litigation system?

Sindhu: Yeah, I mean, people need to be really educated on the level of injuries for each drug and device that we do, right? A heart attack is a much different situation than Alzheimer's that affects the rest of your life, that there is no cure for. Ovarian cancer — so serious and fatal, right? So the level of injury is so important. We work with a lot of experts on what the financial repercussion is to our clients, because really, at the end of the day, they are the most important. The only thing in this equation that really matters is them, and how we get the right resolution for them.

That said, unfortunately, about mass torts — the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. So sometimes the people who are very, very greatly affected — because of these grids, if it's a global settlement, or even in your own firm's aggregate settlements — you cannot please everybody. But certainly, in terms of the defendants, you can't bring a $4.85 billion settlement against somebody who can't pay it. And so there is a lot of investigation that goes in prior to us even filing and reviewing cases. The way we pick a case and decide upon a case has a lot to do with the defendant's ability to pursue and be able to settle in this matter, because that's what's generally going to happen. And how many people are really affected out there?

So there's certainly a lot more math than I was ever good at, but I've gotten a lot better throughout the years. We do all these calculations of what we think the per-case average is going to be, and have to apply that across — especially in leadership. It's not just about my cases at Scott and Scott, it's about everybody's cases. You apply that formula to everyone, and do we think that's an attainable goal to get? Because at the end of the day, we have to keep fighting for what's fair. We can't just say, oh, well, this is what they say they can come up with. Since the dawn of time of us doing this, every defendant says, oh, we might declare bankruptcy. And that's a threat, and you have to decide how real of a threat that is, because that has its own repercussions for the company.

But I think it's something we really have to fight against as plaintiffs' attorneys in this day and age, where defendants are claiming bankruptcy and using the bankruptcy court in a way that was never intended, right? There's true bankruptcy, and things happen to companies all the time. But not paying plaintiffs what they're due should not be the reason why a company can declare bankruptcy within a few hours and then allocate resources to a new corporation. So I think it's something that we, as plaintiffs' attorneys, especially in this area, have to really come back against.

Ray: The last couple of years there's been more conversation about representation in leadership appointments — whether it's having more women in leadership, or people of color. And I'm curious about your perspective on that — on where the plaintiff's bar has improved or done well, and where there's room for improvement.

Sindhu: I think we've done really well. I think Judge Fallon in Xarelto really kind of started this off. He saw that you couldn't have the same people always in leadership, and he wanted to see women and people of color, and so he really made sure that that happened. And I think we've done great. There's always room for improvement. It's really important, especially in litigations — there are a lot of litigations, Depo-Provera is one of them, where this affects women, right? It's a drug-device type of situation that affects women. And I think it's really important to have our clients know that it's people like them who are representing them as well.

But I also believe in qualifications, right? I don't want you to pick me because I'm a woman or a person of color. I want you to pick me because I'm really, really qualified. And there's so many of us out here. So I think it's important to show the next generation that it's important to be representative across everywhere — not just the plaintiff's bar. The defense bar really holds itself to a standard, because they have to. Not because they're necessarily better people — I think they have these big corporations that have these incentives, and they have clients for these big corporations who want to see people be given equal opportunities. Some of these corporations have rules. So you do see sometimes that they have more women or people of color in their groups and their ranks than we do. But we are doing so much better, and so quickly. In a short period of time, I think we have done so well in really getting more people appointed to these leadership committees. The judges have done a great job in making that a real priority.

But at the end of the day, I never lose sight of the fact that it's our clients who we represent, and I want our clients to have the best leadership possible. And I do think that there are plenty of minorities and diverse people out there who can make that happen. So I think it's really important to keep going with that and making sure every slate should be diverse. Because I think it's easy to fall back on that five white males. But in fairness, I think they also understand the need to be representative for a host of reasons — not just to have different voices, but also to have younger people who are more technologically advanced. That is a really important thing for me, where I try to weigh the great traditions of the MDL that I have with also the technology and the way it's advanced. And younger people have had much more success — they understand a lot of AI technology and just different vendors, everything. So there's room for improvement always, in everything. But I certainly do think we have made great strides in terms of getting more and more people appointed. But I always want to see us do better.

Ray: So a few months ago, of course, you joined Scott and Scott. How has that experience been, and what drew you to that firm and to make that jump?

Sindhu: Yeah, I will say that what drew me to the firm is it's an international firm, which is something that's really novel, certainly in mass torts. David and Daryl Scott, who are the owners of this firm, are really genuinely kind, nice people, and they really want to see mass torts succeed and do well. And so they're really what drove me to the firm. I spoke with them, and they wanted to really put the mass in mass torts at their firm. They really believe in this area of practice, and they wanted to increase their visibility in it. And so I was brought on. It's an international firm, meaning we have firms all over the world, which is very, very different for most mass torts. It's a large firm. So I love everything about it. I travel a lot, and I get to see how we're doing things in all parts of the firm.

But really, it's both of them who really drove me to the firm. Their oversight of how they treat their employees, and the oversight into each area of practice, is really great too. We have a lot of autonomy, and they want us to do what we want to do and what we believe in. They really believe in our approach and experience, and kind of let us fly.

Ray: So my last question for you — and I really appreciate the time — but you've been doing this, you said, for about 25 years. What's the next 10, 15, 20, 25 years for you? What do you see as big trends and things that you really want to tackle?

Sindhu: I think, number one, I've got to keep working. That's the first thing. You'll have to see me for the next 15 years, probably — hopefully a little bit less. But I would probably work till I can't anymore, or till someone tells me I shouldn't anymore, because I really do enjoy what I do. And in that sense, I really think that's important for all of us — like, if you don't enjoy it, get out. I think the trend is this water contamination, and that PFAS kind of thing, is really important — the way in which it wasn't controlled. And unfortunately, it takes so many years for that to build up in people's bodies and see the effects that it'll have on us, and a lot of different types of chemicals that, as a child of the '70s, we kind of didn't know we were putting in our bodies and didn't take probably seriously enough. So much information has been uncovered. So I do think that that's probably going to be a trend. I think you see that PFAS is more of like the newer asbestos kind of situation — a case that will last a long time.

You know, unfortunately, you always see cases and drugs and devices that affect women, and situations that affect children. And that's certainly something that's really important to me — to keep trying to push to make sure that we get the highest values for them, and really, at the end of the day, hopefully scare defendants enough to stop making this such a risk and a threat. I think the sexual assault and sexual violence cases — I hope every state opens up the ability to prosecute people who have abused them. I think it's really an important litigation across the board. I hope that those types of cases continue in terms of being increased, and the relief, because that's all we can do is help them financially and get them the help they need.

I hope that we're able to do those types of cases that really not just matter for one person, but give courage to other people to come forward. And those are the cases that I really think — when you work in mass torts, certainly at different levels, you don't get to interact with the plaintiffs as much as you would like to. Their stories, and those deeply personal sexual assault stories — there's nothing worse that can happen. And I hope that we continue to litigate those cases and move them forward and try to get relief for people. That is just so necessary.

Ray: Sindhu, again, thanks so much for taking the time to join the podcast, and I appreciate your perspective. And again, congrats on the new adventure at Scott and Scott. Thanks so much.

Sindhu: Thank you guys for having me. It's a real honor.

Thanks for listening to this episode of Raising the Bar with RebuttalPR. Don't forget to subscribe and follow to join us next time. See you then.