Professor William B. Rubenstein appears to be an attorneys' fees expert with experience in high-profile mass tort and class action litigation, though his academic credentials and institutional affiliation are not documented in available records. His case history spans major litigation including the NFL concussion MDL, Walmart wage-and-hour class actions, and notably three Roundup/glyphosate cases that appear misclassified in the data given his fees specialty rather than product liability expertise. His methodology and specific academic background in fee calculation, reasonableness standards, and settlement distribution remain undocumented, creating uncertainty about his qualifications despite his involvement in billion-dollar litigations. Rubenstein's track record shows a slight plaintiff preference (3 of 7 identified cases) with involvement in some of the most significant mass settlements in recent history. His appearance in MDL-2323 (NFL concussion) and the PG&E bankruptcy suggests experience with complex fee arrangements in large-scale resolutions. However, the absence of any Daubert challenges - either successful defenses or exclusions - could indicate either that his testimony is uncontroversial or that his involvement has been limited. The misclassification of his Roundup cases as product liability rather than fee-related work suggests potential data quality issues that may mask his true specialization. For plaintiff attorneys, Rubenstein represents both opportunity and risk. His involvement in major MDLs suggests he understands the complexity of fee arrangements in mass tort settlements and may provide credible testimony on reasonableness standards. However, the lack of documented credentials is a significant red flag that could undermine his credibility under Daubert scrutiny, particularly if opposing counsel challenges his qualifications as an expert rather than just a practicing attorney. Before engagement, plaintiff counsel should thoroughly vet his academic credentials, published work on attorneys' fees, and the specific nature of his prior testimony. If opposing this expert, focus Daubert challenges on the foundation of his expertise rather than his methodology, as the qualification hurdle may be easier to clear than attacking established fee calculation methods.
No Daubert challenges on record.
Free during beta. Your inquiry will be sent to MTAA and the expert if they've claimed their profile.
We'll send a verification link to your email. Once verified you can add contact info, bio, and availability.