Federal Judge Rejects Johnson & Johnson Bankruptcy Strategy, Paving Way for Talc Victims to Seek Justice in Trial Courts
Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) faced a significant legal setback as U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Christopher Lopez rejected the company's third bankruptcy attempt to shield itself from talcum powder liability claims. The ruling enables thousands of ovarian cancer patients to pursue their cases in trial courts and through multidistrict litigation.
Despite having a market capitalization of approximately $400 billion, J&J attempted to use bankruptcy protection through different company names (LTL, LLT, and Red River) to force victims into what plaintiffs' attorneys described as an inadequate settlement. The company had previously discontinued talc-based powder sales in North America in 2020 and globally in 2023.
The legal proceedings will now move to trial courts and juries, including the MDL in New Jersey federal court and state courts, where claimants will pursue bellwether trials to establish liability and compensation for allegations that J&J's talc-based Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products caused ovarian cancer in thousands of women.
Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) ha subito un significativo colpo legale poiché il giudice della Corte Fallimentare degli Stati Uniti, Christopher Lopez, ha respinto il terzo tentativo di fallimento dell'azienda per proteggersi dalle richieste di risarcimento legate al talco. La sentenza consente a migliaia di pazienti affetti da cancro ovarico di perseguire i loro casi nei tribunali e attraverso la litigazione multidistrettuale.
Nonostante abbia una capitalizzazione di mercato di circa $400 miliardi, J&J ha tentato di utilizzare la protezione fallimentare attraverso diversi nomi aziendali (LTL, LLT e Red River) per costringere le vittime a un accordo che gli avvocati dei querelanti hanno descritto come inadeguato. L'azienda aveva precedentemente interrotto le vendite di polveri a base di talco in Nord America nel 2020 e a livello globale nel 2023.
I procedimenti legali si sposteranno ora nei tribunali e nelle giurie, inclusa la MDL nella corte federale del New Jersey e nei tribunali statali, dove i reclamanti perseguiranno processi pilota per stabilire la responsabilità e il risarcimento per le accuse secondo cui il talco contenuto nei prodotti Baby Powder e Shower to Shower di J&J ha causato cancro ovarico a migliaia di donne.
Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) enfrentó un importante revés legal, ya que el juez del Tribunal de Quiebras de EE. UU., Christopher Lopez, rechazó el tercer intento de quiebra de la compañía para protegerse de las reclamaciones de responsabilidad por talco. La decisión permite a miles de pacientes con cáncer de ovario seguir adelante con sus casos en los tribunales y a través de litigios multidistritales.
A pesar de tener una capitalización de mercado de aproximadamente $400 mil millones, J&J intentó utilizar la protección por quiebra a través de diferentes nombres de empresa (LTL, LLT y Red River) para forzar a las víctimas a un acuerdo que los abogados de los demandantes describieron como inadecuado. La compañía había suspendido previamente las ventas de polvo a base de talco en América del Norte en 2020 y a nivel mundial en 2023.
Los procedimientos legales ahora se trasladarán a los tribunales y jurados, incluida la MDL en la corte federal de Nueva Jersey y los tribunales estatales, donde los reclamantes buscarán juicios piloto para establecer la responsabilidad y la compensación por las alegaciones de que los productos Baby Powder y Shower to Shower a base de talco de J&J causaron cáncer de ovario en miles de mujeres.
존슨 앤 존슨 (NYSE:JNJ)은 미국 파산 법원 판사 크리스토퍼 로페즈가 탈크 파우더 책임 청구로부터 자신을 보호하기 위한 회사의 세 번째 파산 시도를 기각함에 따라 중대한 법적 좌절을 겪었습니다. 이 판결은 수천 명의 난소암 환자가 재판 법원과 다중 관할 소송을 통해 사건을 진행할 수 있도록 합니다.
약 $4000억의 시장 가치를 가진 J&J는 피해자들을 변호사들이 불충분한 합의라고 설명한 것으로 강제하기 위해 다양한 회사 이름(LTL, LLT 및 Red River)을 통해 파산 보호를 시도했습니다. 이 회사는 2020년에 북미에서, 2023년에는 전 세계에서 탈크 기반 파우더 판매를 중단한 바 있습니다.
법적 절차는 이제 재판 법원과 배심원으로 이동하며, 여기에는 뉴저지 연방 법원의 MDL 및 주 법원이 포함되어 있으며, 청구인들은 J&J의 탈크 기반 베이비 파우더 및 샤워 투 샤워 제품이 수천 명의 여성에게 난소암을 유발했다는 혐의에 대한 책임과 보상을 확립하기 위해 벨웨더 재판을 진행할 것입니다.
Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) a subi un revers juridique important, car le juge de la Cour de faillite des États-Unis, Christopher Lopez, a rejeté la troisième tentative de faillite de l'entreprise pour se protéger des demandes de responsabilité liées à la poudre de talc. Le jugement permet à des milliers de patientes atteintes de cancer de l'ovaire de poursuivre leurs affaires devant les tribunaux et à travers des litiges multidistricts.
Bien qu'ayant une capitalisation boursière d'environ 400 milliards de dollars, J&J a tenté d'utiliser la protection de la faillite sous différents noms d'entreprise (LTL, LLT et Red River) pour forcer les victimes à un règlement que les avocats des plaignants ont qualifié d'inadéquat. L'entreprise avait précédemment cessé la vente de poudres à base de talc en Amérique du Nord en 2020 et dans le monde entier en 2023.
Les procédures judiciaires passeront désormais devant les tribunaux et les jurys, y compris la MDL dans la cour fédérale du New Jersey et les tribunaux d'État, où les demandeurs poursuivront des procès pilotes pour établir la responsabilité et l'indemnisation des allégations selon lesquelles les produits à base de talc Baby Powder et Shower to Shower de J&J ont causé le cancer de l'ovaire chez des milliers de femmes.
Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) erlitt einen erheblichen rechtlichen Rückschlag, als der US-Insolvenzrichter Christopher Lopez den dritten Insolvenzantrag des Unternehmens ablehnte, um sich vor Haftungsansprüchen im Zusammenhang mit Talkumpuder zu schützen. Das Urteil ermöglicht es Tausenden von Patientinnen mit Eierstockkrebs, ihre Fälle vor den Gerichten und durch multidistriktliche Klagen weiterzuverfolgen.
Trotz einer Marktkapitalisierung von etwa 400 Milliarden US-Dollar versuchte J&J, Insolvenzschutz unter verschiedenen Firmennamen (LTL, LLT und Red River) zu nutzen, um die Opfer zu einem, wie die Klägeranwälte es beschrieben, unzureichenden Vergleich zu zwingen. Das Unternehmen hatte zuvor 2020 den Verkauf von Talkum-basierten Puder in Nordamerika und 2023 weltweit eingestellt.
Die rechtlichen Verfahren werden nun in die Gerichte und vor Geschworene verlegt, einschließlich der MDL im Bundesgericht von New Jersey und den Landesgerichten, wo die Kläger Vorversuche anstreben, um die Haftung und Entschädigung für die Vorwürfe festzustellen, dass die Talkum-basierten Produkte Baby Powder und Shower to Shower von J&J bei Tausenden von Frauen Eierstockkrebs verursacht haben.
- None.
- Court rejected company's attempt to shield itself from talc liability claims
- Faces potential significant financial exposure from thousands of ovarian cancer lawsuits
- Legal proceedings moving to trial courts could result in substantial settlement costs
- Company's repeated bankruptcy attempts viewed as bad-faith maneuvers by the court
Insights
The bankruptcy court's dismissal of J&J's third attempt to resolve talc litigation through bankruptcy represents a significant legal setback for the company. Judge Lopez's ruling effectively ends what plaintiffs' attorneys have characterized as a "Texas Two-Step" strategy, where J&J created subsidiaries to hold talc liabilities and then placed those entities in bankruptcy to force a global settlement under more favorable terms.
This ruling has three critical implications: First, it returns thousands of cases to the tort system where individual jury trials typically yield higher awards than bankruptcy settlements. Second, it preserves the bellwether trial process in the multidistrict litigation, which will establish precedent for liability and damages that could affect all remaining cases. Third, it creates challenging precedent for other solvent corporations attempting similar liability management strategies.
The legal landscape now shifts dramatically as plaintiffs gain substantial leverage. Historically, jury verdicts in talc cases have resulted in awards ranging from millions to billions, though many have been reduced or overturned on appeal. With bankruptcy protection removed, J&J faces exposure to potentially inconsistent verdicts across multiple jurisdictions and the prospect of years of costly litigation.
The court's reasoning appears to center on J&J's solvency (
This court ruling introduces substantial financial uncertainty for J&J that investors should monitor closely. By rejecting the bankruptcy strategy, the ruling exposes J&J to a less predictable liability profile than what would have emerged from a controlled bankruptcy settlement.
The financial implications are multilayered: First, litigation costs will likely increase as J&J must defend numerous individual cases rather than negotiating a single resolution. Second, jury verdicts typically result in higher damages than negotiated settlements, potentially increasing the ultimate liability. Third, the timing of cash outflows becomes less predictable, complicating capital allocation planning.
While the exact financial exposure remains undetermined, historical precedent in mass tort litigation suggests the aggregate liability could be material even for a company of J&J's size. Past talc verdicts have resulted in substantial damage awards, though many were later modified through appeals.
J&J has likely established reserves for these liabilities, but the question becomes whether those reserves adequately reflect this new litigation pathway. The lack of a bankruptcy resolution mechanism means the company may need to reassess its provisioning strategy in upcoming quarters.
From a balance sheet perspective, J&J remains well-capitalized with substantial cash reserves and strong operating cash flows, suggesting it can absorb significant settlements without threatening overall financial stability. However, this development introduces additional uncertainty that could affect investor sentiment and potentially impact capital allocation decisions, including share repurchases or acquisition strategies.
Court ruling marks major victory for ovarian cancer patients as legal battle shifts to multidistrict litigation
The ruling clears the way for claimants to seek speedy jury trials in state courts and through the bellwether process in multidistrict litigation (MDL).
“This decision affirms what we have argued all along — J&J’s bankruptcy strategy was nothing more than a bad-faith maneuver to avoid full accountability,” said Andy Birchfield of the Beasley Allen Law Firm. “With this ruling, we are now moving forward without delay to trial, where our clients will finally have the chance to present their cases before a jury and obtain the justice they deserve.”
Judge Lopez’s ruling follows years of J&J’s attempts to manipulate the bankruptcy process to force victims into an inadequate settlement. J&J has filed for bankruptcy three separate times in three different venues and has used three different company names, including LTL, LLT, and this latest,
“This case has always been about fairness,” said Adam Silverstein from Otterbourg P.C., one of the lead attorneys representing The Coalition of Counsel for Justice for Talc Claimants, which opposed the bankruptcy. “J&J tried to wear down victims through delay tactics, legal loopholes, and backroom deals. Today’s ruling shuts down that abuse and ensures that real people — not corporate executives — will decide what justice looks like.”
The ruling comes after vigorous opposition from the
“The Court’s decision is a victory for fairness and the integrity of the bankruptcy process,” said Brian Glasser, founder of Bailey Glasser and co-lead counsel to the Coalition. “This ruling recognizes that the plan put forth by
With the bankruptcy case dismissed, the legal fight now shifts to trial courts and juries, including the MDL in
Mr. Birchfield emphasized that his team will push for expedited proceedings to ensure that affected women, many of whom have been waiting for years, do not face further delays.
“We recognize that many women and their families did support the plan and the finality it promised. We want them to know that we will pursue everything possible to assure that J&J will finally recognize its responsibility and engage in fair settlement discussions,” Mr. Birchfield said. “When J&J is ready to get serious about justly compensating all women with talc-related ovarian cancer, we’ll be there to meet them.”
Richard Golomb of Golomb Legal, co-leader of The Coalition, also praised the decision. “For too long, Johnson & Johnson has used delay tactics to sidestep accountability,” he said. “With this ruling, we move forward with the goal of ensuring that every woman harmed by J&J’s products has her day in court. The victims deserve justice, and this ruling brings us one step closer to that goal, As the court said, the voices of the claimants deserve to be heard.”
Mr. Birchfield also highlighted the financial burden many victims have faced. “Many of our clients are hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt due to medical bills and insurance liens. Any fair compensation must consider not only the suffering endured but also the financial devastation these women have experienced. That is what we will fight for in court,” he stated.
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250401705697/en/
Media Contact:
Mike Androvett
800-559-4534
mike@androvett.com
Source: Beasley Allen Law Firm
FAQ
What is the significance of the bankruptcy court ruling against Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)?
How many bankruptcy attempts did Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) make in the talc cases?
When did Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) stop selling talc-based products?
Where will the Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) talc cases proceed after the bankruptcy dismissal?
