fbpx

Johnson & Johnson Talc Bankruptcy Petition Dismissal is a Win for Mesothelioma and Ovarian Cancer Victims

mesothelioma attorney Dave Butler

By Dave Butler

In a significant victory for injured consumers, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the bankruptcy petition of a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary that holds the company’s liabilities for claims brought by thousands of consumers injured by exposure to asbestos-contaminated talc in Johnson & Johnson products.  The dismissal, on January 30, 2023, ends for now J&J’s efforts to avoid full responsibility for the claims of those suffering from mesothelioma, ovarian, and other cancers caused by its asbestos-contaminated products.

Through a series of corporate transactions under a unique Texas law, Johnson & Johnson created two new entities with the intention to funnel its liabilities for claims brought by thousands of injured talc claimants into a new entity which it named LTL Management; while simultaneously funneling all of its profitable business into another entity.  Two days after its formation and freshly saddled with J&J’s talc liabilities, LTL Management filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code claiming that its talc liabilities placed it in financial distress sufficient to allow it to seek the protections afforded by U.S. bankruptcy laws.

Injured talc victims sought dismissal of the bankruptcy petition, but were denied by a federal court in New Jersey.  Victims appealed that denial to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the J&J subsidiary had not demonstrated that its petition was filed in good faith and should be dismissed.

In its opinion the court found that “At base level, LTL, whose employees are all J&J employees, is essentially a shell company “formed,” almost exclusively, “to manage and defend thousands of talc-related claims” while insulating at least the assets in a non-bankrupt entity.  The court went on to find that “Because LTL was not in financial distress, it cannot show its petition served a valid bankruptcy purpose and was filed in good faith under” the United States Bankruptcy Code.  In conclusion, the court held that:

Our decision dismisses the bankruptcy filing of a company created to file for bankruptcy. It restricts J&J’s ability to move thousands of claims out of trial courts and into bankruptcy court so they may be resolved, in J&J’s words, “equitably” and “efficiently.” But given Chapter 11’s ability to redefine fundamental rights of third parties, only those facing financial distress can call on bankruptcy’s tools to do so. Applied here, while LTL faces substantial future talc liability, its funding backstop plainly mitigates any financial distress foreseen on its petition date.

Read the court’s full opinion here.

RPWB continues to seek justice for victims of exposure to Johnson & Johnson talc products. If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with mesothelioma after exposure to Johnson & Johnson talc products, please call us at u 1-866-594-8765 or fill out the form on this page to begin your case review.

Dave Butler has 30 years of experience representing mesothelioma victims and their families in cases throughout the United States. He can be reached at 1-866-594-8765 or by emailing dbutler@rpwb.com.

Our Experienced Lawyers

How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

    Contact Us

    Case Types

    Related Posts

    Asbestos litigation: Johnson & Johnson faces another lawsuit

    South Carolina consumers should feel confident that they are making safe purchases, but this is unfortunately more difficult than it seems. Companies are frequently more concerned with their own bottom lines than they are with the health and safety of their customers. Concerned over citizens’ safety, one state is engaging in asbestos litigation against Valeant Pharmaceuticals and Johnson & Johnson.

    The attorney general for this Southwestern state filed a lawsuit against these two companies, citing their alleged knowledge of toxic substances in some of their consumer goods. That suit accuses both of these companies of aggressively marketing their products to minority groups — specifically African-American and Hispanic residents — despite having known for decades that their talc products were contaminated with asbestos. These two groups make up about 50% of the state’s population.

    Not only did Johnson & Johnson allegedly misrepresent the safety of its talc-based baby powder and several other products, but it did so despite being fully aware of the implications. In a document that outlined the marketing strategy for that state, the company fully acknowledged that talc negatively impacts communities’ health and is linked to cancer. The attorney general who filed the suit also claims that Johnson & Johnson still misrepresents the toxic nature of its talc products.

    Some companies seem to feel as if consumer safety does not matter so long as they are turning profits. This dangerous approach to business jeopardizes the health and well being of everyone in South Carolina. For those who have developed mesothelioma, lung cancer or other diseases because of dangerous products, it is possible to seek compensation through asbestos litigation.

    Our Experienced Lawyers

    How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

      Contact Us

      Case Types

      Related Posts

      What you should know about asbestos litigation in South Carolina

      Maybe you never imagined that you would develop mesothelioma or another type of asbestos-related disease, but that does not change the fact that you did. You understand just how difficult it is to live with one of these diseases. On top of pain and suffering, you may have a diminished quality of life and hefty medical bills you are struggling to pay. If you need help getting compensation for your injuries and are ready to pursue asbestos litigation in South Carolina, here is what you can expect.

      Before you file your lawsuit, you need to decide who to name as the defendant or defendants. If you were exposed to asbestos at work, you will probably include your employer. Asbestos exposure can also occur in the home, and if you were renting your landlord or leasing agent could also be responsible. Asbestos manufacturers, installers and companies that irresponsibly used asbestos are also commonly named in these types of lawsuits.

      Figuring out who to name in a lawsuit is not as easy as it may seem. Even if you know that you were exposed at work, you will need to prove who was involved with manufacturing or even using the asbestos. This can be a difficult task since patients suffering from mesothelioma were usually exposed to asbestos years or even decades before getting sick.

      Uncovering details from the past several decades can be a long, difficult process, so you should consider speaking with an experienced attorney. He or she can not only help you name the correct defendants, but wil also help you lay out your case, determine compensation to claim and file a complaint on your behalf. You can learn more about the asbestos litigation process in South Carolina by visiting our website.

      Our Experienced Lawyers

      How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

        Contact Us

        Case Types

        Related Posts

        Couple pursues asbestos litigation over husband’s injuries

        Victims who develop mesothelioma or other related diseases often do so after only being exposed to asbestos from a single source, such as through employment. However, some victims in South Carolina might have developed asbestos-related diseases after multiple sources of exposure. One couple is currently in the middle of asbestos litigation for this type of situation.

        The couple, who live in a different state, filed a lawsuit that named multiple defendants, including Johnson & Johnson, Brenntag Specialties Inc., Brenntag North America Inc., 3M Co., and more. The suit claims that these companies were negligent in their use of asbestos. The couple claims that the various companies did not adequately warn people about asbestos exposure or provide warning on product packages. The suit also alleges that the defendants did not properly design or manufacture products that were safe to use.

        The husband says that he developed injuries because of ongoing exposure to asbestos through the products that these companies manufactured. One of the places that exposure took place was at his place of work, which was through a local school district. He also claims that he had used talcum powders and Old Spice, which were also sources of exposure. The suit also points to the clothing the man had received from his late father, but did not specify the manner in which the clothing was contaminated with asbestos.

        Developing a disease or suffering an injury after being exposed to asbestos is a very difficult experience. Most people end up with large medical bills or related damages that make it difficult to continue living life as normal. Pursuing compensation through asbestos litigation could be helpful for South Carolina victims and their families who are going through this ordeal.

        Our Experienced Lawyers

        How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

          Contact Us

          Case Types

          Related Posts