Mass Tort Marketing: How Law Firms Generate Cases at Scale in 2026

A mass tort campaign can sign 500 cases or lose $2 million - and the difference almost never comes down to creative. It comes down to whether the litigation math works and whether your intake operation can handle the volume.

I've overseen mass tort campaigns for PI firms spending $500K+/month. I've watched firms make extraordinary returns on torts they entered early with a clear thesis. I've also watched firms pour $2M into a campaign based on inflated settlement projections and come out underwater. The marketing mechanics are well understood at this point. The part that kills campaigns is almost always either the litigation economics or the intake operation - and most mass tort marketing guides don't talk about either because their authors are selling you leads.

This guide is written from a different position. I'm not selling you media time, leads, or an agency retainer. My job is to tell you what I actually know about mass tort marketing - including when it doesn't make sense.

What Makes Mass Tort Marketing Different From Regular PI Marketing

If you run a personal injury firm, you already understand lead generation. You're finding people who were recently injured - car accidents, slip and falls, premises liability - and converting them to clients. The marketing challenge is reaching someone right after an injury event and getting them to choose your firm.

Mass tort marketing is fundamentally different in several ways that change every piece of the strategy.

In standard PI, you're marketing to people who know they need a lawyer. In mass tort, you're marketing to people who may not know they have a legal claim. Someone who used a contaminated product for years and developed a disease diagnosis has a potential claim - but they're not searching for a lawyer. They don't know there's litigation. Your job isn't just to win the conversion - it's to create the awareness that a claim exists.

The scale difference is significant. A typical PI firm signs 5-20 cases per month. A mass tort campaign is designed to acquire hundreds or thousands of claimants for a single litigation. The infrastructure, the intake operation, and the budget requirements are in a completely different category.

The litigation vehicle matters too. Most large-scale mass torts consolidate into Multi-District Litigation (MDL) - a federal procedure that groups thousands of similar cases before a single judge for pretrial proceedings. MDL structure concentrates both the upside (economies of scale, coordinated discovery, bellwether trials to set settlement values) and the risk. If the MDL goes badly - weak bellwether results, a defense-friendly judge, changed evidence - the entire portfolio of cases is affected simultaneously.

The economics require a realistic investment horizon. Mass tort campaigns need significant upfront capital - often $500,000 to several million dollars - before a single case settles. The ROI horizon on most mass torts is 3-7 years from initial case acquisition to final distribution. This is not a cash flow play. It's a capital allocation decision.

The competitive environment reflects the scale of the opportunity. Legal services advertising in 2024 exceeded $2.5 billion across all mediums - and mass tort advertising represents a major share of that. The largest litigation groups spend $500,000 to $2M+/month on mass tort media. When you enter a mass tort campaign, you are competing for claimants against firms with enormous media budgets and years of campaign experience in that specific tort.

This guide is written for law firms already in or seriously evaluating mass tort work - firms with the capital, intake infrastructure, and practice area experience to run a meaningful campaign. If you're a solo practitioner or a firm under $5M in revenue looking for a new revenue stream, this is useful background but the economics won't work at your current scale.

Mass Tort Marketing Channels - Where the Cases Actually Come From

Mass tort case acquisition happens across four primary channels. Understanding how each works - not just that it exists - is the difference between a campaign that generates profitable cases and one that generates expensive lessons.

Television and National Media Buying

TV remains the dominant acquisition channel for large-scale mass tort campaigns. The reason is simple: reach per dollar for a national audience is unmatched by any other medium. And mass tort demographics often skew toward audiences that over-index for TV consumption - older adults, people on fixed incomes, daytime and late-night cable viewers.

Effective mass tort TV campaigns run on cable news, daytime broadcast, and late-night cable. The creative needs to do specific work: clearly identify the product or substance, state the relevant diagnoses or conditions, specify the relevant time period of exposure, and drive to a phone number or landing page. This is why "mass tort campaign script" is actually a searched term - the script format matters, and there's a structure that works.

A meaningful national TV campaign for mass tort typically requires $50,000-$100,000/month at minimum to generate useful data on performance. Serious national campaigns run $500,000+/month. Below the minimum threshold, you don't have enough frequency to move the needle in any given market.

The attribution challenge with TV is real. Every phone number in your TV creative should be a dedicated, trackable call tracking number. Even then, attribution windows stretch over weeks - someone may see your ad three times before calling. The key metrics to track are cost per call, cost per qualified lead after intake screening, and cost per signed retainer. Build those three numbers before you scale spend.

Digital Advertising - Facebook, YouTube, and Programmatic

Digital advertising is the second major channel for mass tort acquisition, and for some torts it outperforms TV because of targeting precision.

Facebook and Meta platforms allow targeting by age, geography, health interest proxies, and behavioral signals. For a tort affecting a specific demographic - say, women over 40 who have used a particular cosmetic product category - that targeting precision is more efficient than broad TV buys. The average CPL for legal services on Facebook is $72.40, though mass tort CPLs vary significantly by tort and competitive environment, ranging from $50 to $500+ depending on how competitive the signing environment is.

Facebook's conversion rate for attorneys and legal services is 10.53% - higher than most people expect from a platform known for low-intent traffic. The creative approach for mass tort on Facebook is awareness-first: you're educating someone that they may have a claim before you ask them to call. Video creative typically outperforms static images for this kind of longer explanation.

YouTube and programmatic display work well for awareness and retargeting. Someone who visited your landing page but didn't call can be retargeted across the web with reminder creative. Given that mass tort claimants often need several touchpoints before they believe the claim is real and contact an attorney, retargeting is a meaningful part of the acquisition stack.

Google Search is less effective for most mass torts than it is for standard PI. The reason: most people with a mass tort claim are not actively searching for a lawyer. They don't know they have a claim. The keyword intent that drives PI conversions doesn't exist in the same way for mass tort. There are exceptions - torts that have had years of heavy media coverage may have some search demand - but don't anchor your mass tort strategy to organic search or branded paid search.

Mass Tort Lead Vendors

Lead vendors are companies that run mass tort advertising campaigns and sell pre-qualified leads to law firms. For firms that want to enter a mass tort without running their own full media campaign, lead vendors are the fastest path to case acquisition.

The model works like this: the vendor runs TV and digital campaigns, fields the incoming calls, screens callers against the qualifying criteria for that specific tort (right diagnosis, right product, right dates of exposure), and sells pre-qualified leads to multiple law firms. The price per lead reflects the vendor's media cost, their screening cost, and their margin.

Typical lead pricing varies dramatically by tort and competitive intensity. Some torts have run $500-$2,000 per lead at moderate competition. High-demand torts at peak campaign periods have exceeded $3,000 per lead. When a tort first gets significant media attention and law firm interest, lead prices spike. When a tort matures or cools (either because the MDL is moving toward resolution or because settlement values are disappointing), prices fall.

For a full evaluation framework on lead vendors, see the next section - it's the most important thing to get right before you write a check.

Co-Counsel and Referral Arrangements

Co-counsel arrangements are the lowest-risk entry point for a firm new to mass tort. The structure is straightforward: you contribute cases from your existing client base or referral network and receive a portion of the attorney fee on cases that resolve.

In most states, referral fees in contingency cases are governed by state bar ethics rules. A referring attorney typically receives 20-40% of the attorney fee on cases they refer, depending on the state, the level of work performed, and the agreement terms. The co-counsel firm handles the MDL litigation, the settlement negotiations, and the distribution.

This model is worth more than its reputation as a "passive" play. A firm with strong community relationships in an affected demographic - say, a family law firm in a community heavily affected by a specific industrial exposure - can generate significant co-counsel revenue from cases already in their orbit. The cases exist. The litigation is funded by the MDL firm. Your job is identification and referral.

How to find co-counsel opportunities: bar association connections in the relevant practice area, litigation support networks, legal conference relationships, and direct outreach to firms running the MDL. Most lead MDL firms are actively seeking co-counsel relationships with firms that have geographic or demographic reach they don't.

How to Evaluate a Mass Tort Lead Vendor (Without Getting Burned)

Every article ranking for "mass tort marketing" is written by a vendor selling mass tort services. There is no independent buyer's guide in this space. This section is that guide.

The inherent conflict is real: vendors have strong incentives to make their leads sound high-quality and their criteria sound rigorous. Your job, before signing any lead purchase agreement, is to verify those claims independently.

The six questions to ask any mass tort lead vendor before signing:

1. Walk me through the exact qualifying criteria and screening script for this specific tort. "Qualified" means something specific for each tort - the right diagnosis, confirmed during the relevant exposure period, with documented medical records. Ask them to walk you through their screening script question by question. If they can't or won't, stop there.

2. What percentage of your leads are returned as unqualified after our firm's own intake review? Industry benchmark: a 15-30% return rate on leads that don't meet criteria after your review is normal. A vendor claiming 0-5% returns is either screening extraordinarily well (rare) or setting criteria so loose that your intake team will reject a significant portion. A return rate above 40% is a serious red flag about lead quality.

3. What is your litigation history with this MDL? Do you have co-counsel agreements with the lead MDL firms? A vendor with no MDL relationships is selling you leads they believe have value without having verified that with the firms actually litigating the cases. Established vendors have relationships with MDL firms and ongoing feedback on case quality.

4. What are your exclusivity terms? Can we buy from other vendors simultaneously? Some vendors require exclusivity - you can only buy from them for a defined period. Others have no exclusivity. Exclusivity terms increase your risk significantly if the leads don't perform. Negotiate for volume-based thresholds over time-based exclusivity.

5. What is your refund or exchange policy for leads that don't meet the stated criteria? Any reputable vendor has a documented policy. "We review returns on a case-by-case basis" without a written policy is not acceptable. Get the return policy in writing before you commit.

6. What call recording and documentation do you provide for every lead? You need to be able to audit any lead you receive - hear the original screening call, see the criteria they used, verify the claimant's answers. If a vendor doesn't provide call recordings, you have no way to verify their screening claims.

Red flags in vendor contracts: Long-term exclusivity clauses with no performance benchmarks. No lead return policy or a policy that requires arbitration for disputes. No audit rights on the screening criteria or call recordings. Payment in advance with no refund provisions.

The pricing reality check: If a vendor is offering leads significantly below market rate for a tort that is currently active and competitive, ask why. Cheap leads are cheap for a reason - either the tort is cooling (settlement values disappointing, MDL moving toward closure), the qualification criteria are weak, or there's a fraud issue with lead sourcing. Understand the reason before you buy volume.

The Camp Lejeune lesson: Camp Lejeune is the most instructive recent case study in mass tort marketing risk. Lead prices spiked to $2,000-$3,000+ per lead during peak demand as the PACT Act litigation opened. Many firms bought aggressively based on settlement projections that didn't materialize for many claimant categories. Settlement offers have come in lower than many firms' break-even cost per case. A lot of firms lost money on a tort that looked like a clear winner two years ago.

If you're evaluating current torts and want an independent assessment of the campaign economics, that's exactly the kind of conversation that starts with a marketing audit.

Current Active Mass Torts - Where Campaign Opportunities Exist in 2026

The litigation landscape changes fast. What's active today may be in late-stage settlement or cooling in six months. This section reflects the state of active MDLs as of early 2026, with an honest assessment of where each stands.

AFFF (Aqueous Film-Forming Foam / Firefighting Foam) Defendants include 3M, DuPont, and other chemical manufacturers. Claims involve PFAS contamination exposure from firefighting foam and resulting cancer diagnoses - particularly among military personnel and airport firefighters. Litigation is still actively signing qualified claimants. Settlement negotiations with major defendants are ongoing but cases are still being filed. Qualification requires documented PFAS exposure and a qualifying cancer diagnosis.

Hair Relaxer / Chemical Hair Straightener Relatively newer litigation targeting manufacturers of chemical hair relaxing products. Claims primarily affect Black women with long-term product use and diagnoses of uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, or endometriosis. Active signing period continues as of early 2026. The demographic targeting required for this tort makes Facebook an effective acquisition channel.

Depo-Provera (Meningioma) Newly emerged as of 2025-2026. Claims involve contraceptive injection users who developed meningioma (typically benign brain tumors). Litigation is early-stage - qualification criteria are still being established through early case filings. This is a tort to watch carefully; the early-entry window is when the best case economics exist, but litigation risk is higher at this stage.

NEC (Necrotizing Enterocolitis) Baby Formula Claims against Abbott and Mead Johnson involving premature infant hospital formula and NEC development. Active signing continues but qualification criteria have tightened as the MDL has progressed. The qualifying claimant profile - premature infants given bovine-based formula in a hospital NICU - is specific and requires medical record verification.

Talcum Powder (Johnson & Johnson) Long-running litigation with complex corporate structure changes. J&J has attempted multiple bankruptcy maneuvers to limit exposure. The litigation is not over but it is in a different phase - more constrained qualification, later-stage MDL dynamics. New case acquisition for this tort requires careful evaluation of where the MDL stands before committing marketing spend.

Camp Lejeune Still active under the PACT Act but the signing environment has changed materially from peak. Lead prices have moderated, settlement offers have come in below early projections for many claimant categories, and many firms are now focused on claims management rather than new acquisition. Evaluate carefully before entering at this stage.

The Evaluation Framework for Any New Tort

Before committing marketing spend to any tort, answer these five questions:

1. Is liability established or still speculative? Early-stage torts carry higher litigation risk.
2. Who are the defendant companies and what is their capacity to pay? Corporate structure matters.
3. Is there an established MDL with lead MDL firms? Random filings without coordination don't produce the same economics.
4. What are the current projected per-claimant settlement ranges and how confident are those projections?
5. How competitive is the signing environment right now? What is the current market cost per signed case?

Mass Tort Campaign Structure - From Media Spend to Signed Retainer

Running a mass tort campaign at any meaningful scale is a business operation, not a marketing campaign that runs alongside normal firm operations. Here is the end-to-end structure.

Step 1: Litigation Selection Choose the tort based on the evaluation framework above - not based on what a vendor is pushing or what you've seen advertised at a legal conference. Validate liability, defendant capacity, MDL structure, and projected economics before writing any checks. Confirm your state bar ethics rules permit the referral fee structures you're planning to use.

Common mistake: Selecting a tort because a co-worker heard settlement values were high. Validate the projections with MDL counsel directly.

Step 2: Budget Planning Mass tort requires upfront capital, and the capital requirement is almost always larger than firms initially project. Build a cash flow model, not just a marketing budget. You need to model: media spend per month, cost per acquired case at your projected CPL and close rate, case management overhead, co-counsel fee arrangements, and your break-even cost per case against projected settlement values. Then build in a 20-30% contingency because mass tort timelines always run longer than initial estimates.

Common mistake: Modeling marketing spend without modeling the full cost per case including intake, case management, and co-counsel fees.

Step 3: Channel Selection and Setup TV for broad reach and call volume in demographics appropriate to the tort. Digital (Facebook, programmatic) for targeting precision and retargeting. Lead vendors for immediate case volume while in-house campaigns scale. Set up dedicated call tracking numbers for every channel before spending a dollar.

Common mistake: Running multiple channels with the same phone number and having no way to attribute cases to their source channel.

Step 4: Intake and Screening This is the most under-invested piece of most mass tort operations, and it's where the most money gets wasted. Firms can waste up to 60% of their marketing spend due to inefficient lead qualification. A poor intake process doesn't just waste marketing money - it accepts unqualified cases that will be rejected at the MDL level, costing you both the lead acquisition cost and the time spent managing a case that goes nowhere.

A proper mass tort intake operation needs: a dedicated screening script for the specific qualifying criteria of this tort, trained intake specialists who understand the medical and factual requirements, a documentation process that captures all qualifying information at first contact, and a CRM that tracks every lead through the qualification funnel.

Common mistake: Using your standard PI intake team for mass tort calls without tort-specific training and screening scripts.

Step 5: Case Qualification Not every signed retainer is a good case. Build a secondary review process - a case manager or attorney review - before cases are forwarded to MDL co-counsel. Cases that fail the secondary review cost you the acquisition expense and co-counsel relationship credibility.

Common mistake: Signing every retainer that intake generates without attorney-level case review before filing.

Step 6: Attribution and Tracking Every media buy needs its own call tracking number. Track cost per call, cost per qualified lead, cost per signed retainer, and cost per filed case as four separate metrics. The ratio between these metrics tells you whether your intake process or your media buy is the performance problem.

Common mistake: Measuring only cost per lead without tracking the downstream funnel metrics that reveal where cases are being lost.

Step 7: Co-Counsel Disposition What happens to cases after intake? Which MDL firm is handling the litigation? What are the fee split terms? When and how are distributions made? These questions need clear answers in writing before your campaign launches, not after you've signed 200 retainers.

Common mistake: Starting acquisition without confirmed co-counsel agreements in place for case disposition.

When a Mass Tort Strategy Makes Sense - And When It Doesn't

Most mass tort marketing content is written by people who benefit when you enter a mass tort campaign. I don't. So here's the honest version.

Mass tort makes sense for your firm when:

You're already doing PI at volume and have an intake infrastructure that can handle rapid case acquisition without collapsing. You have the capital to fund a 12-24 month campaign before seeing meaningful settlements - and that capital is genuinely available without creating cash flow risk. You have or can access co-counsel relationships with established MDL firms. Your state bar ethics rules are compatible with the referral fee structures involved. And you've done the litigation math: projected settlement range per case, your cost per acquired case, your co-counsel fee split, and your break-even works.

Mass tort does not make sense when:

Your firm lacks a dedicated intake team. You're undercapitalized and need short-term case inventory to fund operating expenses - mass tort will not solve a cash flow problem; it will create a bigger one. You're looking at a tort where bellwether results have already come in lower than the projections that drove lead prices. The marketing competition for that tort has already driven cost per signed case to levels where the economics don't work at reasonable settlement values. Or your state bar has specific restrictions on the referral arrangements you're planning.

The capital question is not negotiable. A meaningful mass tort campaign requires $500,000 to $2M+ in marketing spend before significant settlements are paid. Most firms that enter mass tort underestimate this by a factor of two. They run out of runway before the litigation matures, then either sell their case inventory at a discount or miss out on the returns that were coming.

I've seen firms spend $2M on mass tort campaigns and lose money because the litigation math didn't work. Before you write a check for media buying or lead vendors, you need to understand the settlement projections, the MDL timeline, and your break-even cost per case. That's a strategic analysis, not a marketing question. If you want an independent review of a specific tort opportunity or your current campaign economics, that's something I can help with.

Talk to Casey About Your Mass Tort Campaign Strategy - Book a Free 30-Minute Call

For firms still in research mode, a marketing audit can also serve as the starting point - it will tell you whether your current case acquisition infrastructure is ready for mass tort volume or whether there are gaps to address first.

Frequently Asked Questions About Mass Tort Marketing

What is the difference between mass tort marketing and regular personal injury marketing?

In personal injury, you're finding people who were recently injured and know they may need a lawyer. In mass tort, you're finding people who were exposed to a specific product - often years ago - who may not know they have a legal claim. You have to create awareness of the claim before you can convert. The scale is also completely different: a mass tort campaign is designed to sign hundreds or thousands of claimants for a single litigation, not 5-20 cases per month. The channels, economics, and intake requirements are in a different category entirely.

How much does a mass tort marketing campaign cost?

A meaningful TV and digital campaign typically requires $50,000-$100,000/month at minimum to generate useful data, and serious national campaigns run $500,000+/month. Buying pre-qualified leads from a vendor can be done at smaller scale, with individual leads typically priced at $500-$3,000+ depending on the tort and competition level. Factor in intake operations, case management overhead, and co-counsel fee structures to build a full cost model. Many firms significantly underestimate the capital required.

What are the current active mass torts in 2026?

Active signing opportunities as of early 2026 include AFFF (firefighting foam/PFAS), hair relaxer/chemical hair straightener, Depo-Provera (meningioma), and NEC baby formula. Camp Lejeune is still active but the signing environment has changed materially from peak. Talcum powder litigation is in late stages. The landscape shifts regularly - some torts are winding down while new ones emerge. An independent evaluation of current tort economics is worth doing before committing to a specific campaign.

How do I know if a mass tort lead vendor is reputable?

Ask for their qualifying criteria in writing, their documented lead return rate (normal is 15-30%), their refund and exchange terms in writing, their litigation history with the relevant MDL, and their audit rights on screening documentation and call recordings. A reputable vendor provides clear answers on all of these. Pressure on any of these questions is a red flag. Never sign a lead purchase agreement without a written return policy.

Can a firm participate in mass tort without running its own media campaign?

Yes - through co-counsel arrangements. You contribute cases from your existing client base or referral network and receive a portion of the attorney fee on cases that resolve. This is the lowest-risk entry point for a firm new to mass tort. It provides exposure to the economics and the litigation without running a $500K+/month media campaign. The trade-off is that the returns are proportionally smaller and entirely dependent on the MDL firm's litigation performance.

What is an MDL and why does it matter for mass tort marketing?

Multi-District Litigation (MDL) is a federal procedure that consolidates thousands of similar cases before one judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings. Most large-scale mass torts become MDLs. Whether an MDL exists, who the lead MDL counsel are, the status of bellwether trials, and how the judge has ruled on key motions are all critical factors in evaluating whether a tort is worth marketing investment. A tort without an established MDL, or one where bellwether results have been adverse, carries significantly higher risk.

Is mass tort still a good investment for law firms in 2026?

It depends entirely on the specific tort and your firm's financial position. Some active torts in 2026 present genuine opportunities for firms with the capital and infrastructure to execute properly. Others are in late stages where the economics have narrowed. The critical analysis is the litigation math - projected settlement range per case, your cost per acquired case at current market lead prices, and your operational costs - not the marketing mechanics. The marketing part is solvable. The litigation economics are either there or they're not.

Mass Tort Is a Financial Decision Before It's a Marketing Decision

Every vendor in this space wants to talk to you about creative, targeting, and lead quality. Those things matter. But they matter in the context of whether the litigation economics justify the campaign.

I've helped firms generate significant returns from well-structured mass tort campaigns. I've also watched firms enter torts at the wrong time with the wrong capital structure and lose meaningful money. The difference almost always comes down to doing the analysis before spending - not after.

If you want an honest, independent assessment of a mass tort opportunity or your current campaign structure, that's the conversation to have.

Book a Free 30-Minute Strategy Call

For context on where mass tort fits within your broader law firm marketing strategy, or how it connects to your personal injury law firm marketing operations, those guides give you the strategic framework.