Our lawyers are handling baby powder lawsuits in all 50 states. The talcum powder lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson have been ongoing for years. The lawsuits allege that prolonged use of talcum powder (or “talc”), the active ingredient in products such as Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, can cause ovarian cancer in some women.
This page provides a J&J talc powder litigation update and discusses the settlement amounts in these ovarian cancer lawsuits for victims.
Below are the latest talc powder lawsuit news updates and information on bringing a claim in 2025.
Has the deadline passed for you to file a talcum powder lawsuit? Many who assume the statute of limitations has passed to sue Johnson & Johnson may be wrong. But as we write this in April 2025, this settlement is about to close out. We are still signing up new clients, but this may not last much longer. Call us today at 800-553-8082 or get a free and quick case review online.
Our legal team is committed to informing you about the ongoing developments in the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation, a case filled with enough high-stakes twists and turns to make for a good movie one day. Here, we provide the latest updates, ensuring you stay up to date on this legal battle in which many of you have a real stake:
April 11, 2025: Following the collapse of Johnson & Johnson’s third failed bankruptcy attempt, federal talcum powder litigation is finally moving forward again with renewed energy. The bankruptcy court ruled that J&J’s proposed $9 billion settlement did not meet the legal standards required to protect the company from ongoing liability. Importantly, J&J has confirmed it will not appeal the ruling, clearing the way for litigation to resume in earnest.
The multidistrict litigation still includes more than 90,000 lawsuits from women and families who allege that J&J’s talc-based products—particularly Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower—were contaminated with asbestos and caused ovarian cancer after prolonged use. While state court juries have already issued several blockbuster verdicts for plaintiffs, no federal MDL case has yet gone to trial—but that’s now expected to change unless we can get to a settlement.
Judge Shipp has asked both sides to submit a joint update on the status of pretrial motions and trial readiness, which they did on April 8. Many of the key issues delayed by the bankruptcy—including fully briefed Rule 702 challenges to expert witnesses—are now back in motion. Both sides agree that resolving these motions is a critical next step before the court can schedule the first bellwether trial, which will provide a crucial signal for possible settlement values.
With J&J’s controversial bankruptcy maneuvers behind it, the path is now clear for plaintiffs to get their day in court. The upcoming rulings on expert testimony and the first scheduled bellwether trials could dramatically shift the pressure back onto J&J to negotiate a real, court-approved global settlement that compensates victims fairly.
April 1, 2025: Only two new cases were added to the talcum powder MDL last month, pushing the total to 58,208. With 3M’s MDL ending, this is now the largest active consolidated mass tort.
March 31, 2025: We have been telling you how nonsensical J&J’s effort to use the bankruptcy process to reach a settlement in the talcum powder lawsuits. Today, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez agreed, dealing a crushing blow to Johnson & Johnson’s ongoing effort to resolve tens of thousands of talc-related cancer lawsuits through bankruptcy.
For now the third time, a federal court has rejected the company’s strategy of using a specially created subsidiary—in this case, Red River Talc LLC—to file Chapter 11 and channel liability into a settlement trust. Judge Lopez dismissed the case outright after finding that the pre-filing vote J&J orchestrated among 93,000 claimants was fundamentally flawed and rushed, stating that the company pushed “an unreasonably short voting time… to get to 75% at any cost.”
This ruling represents far more than a procedural setback. It is a sharp rebuke of what plaintiffs and critics have long described as a bad-faith abuse of the bankruptcy system by one of the wealthiest companies in the world. J&J has repeatedly attempted to invoke the protections of Chapter 11. This ruling hopefully puts to bed the idea that solvent mass tort defendants can manipulate bankruptcy rules to avoid the jury trial system.
From a strategic standpoint, J&J attempted to shift its legal battle to a more favorable jurisdiction. After earlier bankruptcy attempts were shut down by the Third Circuit (which held the company was not in sufficient financial distress), J&J moved its litigation to the Fifth Circuit, known to be more receptive to aggressive corporate bankruptcy strategies. However, even under this seemingly more hospitable jurisdiction, J&J could not find a judge to bless this process.
So what is the plan from here? J&J will appeal as always. But it is really a long shot. So for plaintiffs, for better or worse, this means litigation resumes in earnest. Victims who have waited years for resolution now move closer to their day in court, where they will have the opportunity to present evidence that J&J’s talc-based products were contaminated with asbestos and caused ovarian cancer and other diseases. The decision restores momentum to a decentralized, jury-driven process that J&J clearly hoped to bypass with a global trust mechanics—hopefully, this jump-starts settlement negotiations outside of the bankruptcy to finally give victims the long-overdue compensation.
March 5, 2025: The Talcum powder MDL remained at a standstill in February, with no new cases added. The total number of pending cases in the MDL remains at 58,206.
February 19, 2025: The moment is here. This week, a critical trial began in Texas to determine the fate of Johnson & Johnson’s third talcum powder bankruptcy. The two-week proceeding, overseen by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez, will feature up to 40 witnesses and focus on allegations that the Chapter 11 filing was made in bad faith and that voting irregularities influenced the approval of a $10 billion settlement plan. The crazy part is that for all that effort, there is a good chance that Judge Lopez has long made up his mind. This is really a philosophical question: you are either for this nonsense or you are not.
Plaintiffs’ lawyers are of two minds on this. Some oppose the bankruptcy, arguing that client votes were improperly switched after additional compensation was negotiated. Others, citing years of litigation without client payouts as a reason to move forward with a settlement. Our position? Both sides have points, but the bankruptcy is utter nonsense.
February 4, 2025: The talcum powder MDL has reached a standstill, with only one new case added in January, following just four new lawsuits in December. The total number of pending cases now stands at 58,206. The bankruptcy is putting a hold on things for now as we go into the big hearing in two weeks.
January 28, 2025: Some plaintiffs are pushing back against this settlement. They argue the $8 billion settlement plan unjustly denies victims their right to pursue claims in court and challenges the legitimacy of J&J’s claim that the settlement is (arguably) supported by over 80% of claimants.
Under the plan, J&J’s bankrupt subsidiary, Red River Talc, would establish a trust to compensate victims based on pre-set criteria, halting all related lawsuits. The holdouts, known as the Coalition of Counsel for Justice, criticize the proposal for lacking proof that funds are sufficient, not meeting bankruptcy standards for asbestos-related cases, and alleging flaws in the voting process. J&J contends that the settlement offers more compensation than trials could and accuses opponents of acting out of financial self-interest.
We will know more next month when all of this comes to a head.
January 24, 2025: Why is Johnson & Johnson so obsessed with resolving the talc litigation through bankruptcy court if they are just settling the cases anyway?
The answer is rooted in a desire for control and predictability. Bankruptcy allows J&J to cap its financial liability, halting the flood of lawsuits and ensuring all current and future claims are handled through a single, centralized process. This streamlined approach eliminates the unpredictability of jury trials and opt-outs, where verdicts have ranged from modest awards to staggering punitive damages. By establishing a trust with pre-defined criteria for payouts, J&J creates uniformity in compensation while avoiding the risk of runaway verdicts that could escalate costs or set damaging legal precedents.
January 7, 2025: A talc trial in Pittsburgh concluded with a defense verdict for Johnson & Johnson, but left a striking message from the jury that cannot be ignored. While the jury determined that the company’s talc products did not cause the plaintiff’s mesothelioma, it simultaneously awarded $22 million in punitive damages. What was the jury trying to do? Who knows? But this contradiction seemingly underscores a clear sentiment from the jury: they believed Johnson & Johnson’s actions warranted punishment, regardless of the ultimate causation finding.
The jury found Johnson & Johnson negligent and agreed that the company misrepresented the safety of its talc products. Although they did not link these actions to the plaintiff’s illness, the decision to award punitive damages speaks volumes about the jury’s perception of the company’s conduct. Despite instructions not to consider punitive damages without causation, the jury’s actions suggest a strong desire to hold Johnson & Johnson accountable.
January 3, 2025: Just four new talc powder lawsuits were filed in the MDL last month. There are now 58,205 total pending cases.
December 29, 2024: The next big thing in this litigation will be the bankruptcy hearing on February 18th. This hearing will determine whether the company’s proposed $10 billion bankruptcy plan can move forward and whether its Chapter 11 case will survive dismissal. For tens of thousands of cancer victims, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
At the center of the trial is J&J’s controversial use of the Texas two-step bankruptcy strategy. We all know this maneuver is designed to shield the company from full accountability while limiting victims’ recoveries. Some plaintiffs are fine with this. They want their money sooner rather than later. But other plaintiffs claim the plan unfairly prioritizes corporate interests over justice for those harmed by asbestos-contaminated talc products.
Adding to the complexity, the trial comes on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy, which struck down similar third-party liability protections. This decision casts doubt on the legality of J&J’s plan, particularly as allegations of voting irregularities persist. Any ruling is likely to face appeals, potentially all the way to the Supreme Court.
For plaintiffs, this trial could mark a step toward justice—or yet another delay in their long fight.
December 5, 2024: Senator Elizabeth Warren has reintroduced the Nondebtor Release Prohibition Act of 2024 to combat controversial bankruptcy strategies that allow wealthy individuals and corporations to sidestep liability. The legislation seeks to end nonconsensual litigation shields for nonbankrupt entities and codify the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in *Harrington v. Purdue Pharma*, which rejected liability releases for the Sackler family in Purdue’s bankruptcy.
Warren also targets the “Texas Two-Step” maneuver, a tactic used by companies like Johnson & Johnson to isolate liabilities in a subsidiary and place it into bankruptcy, shielding the parent company from lawsuits. The bill’s provisions aim to close loopholes that have allowed corporations to misuse the bankruptcy system to avoid accountability for widespread harm, such as public health crises and mass tort claims.
This legislation, while previously seen as a partisan effort by progressive Democrats, is increasingly attracting bipartisan interest. The *Harrington v. Purdue Pharma* decision and public outrage over corporate misuse of bankruptcy have galvanized lawmakers across party lines. Notably, a bipartisan group introduced the Ending Corporate Bankruptcy Abuse Act earlier this year to address similar issues. Republicans traditionally aligned with pro-business interests may now find common ground with Democrats on this issue, provided they can resist lobbying pressure from powerful corporate interests. As both parties face growing voter discontent over corporate accountability, this could become a rare opportunity for bipartisan reform.
The Nondebtor Release Prohibition Act of 2024—which could also fairly be called the Stop Johnson & Johnson’s Nonsense Act—would have a significant impact on Johnson & Johnson’s talc bankruptcy strategy, particularly its use of the Texas Two-Step maneuver. By invalidating bankruptcy filings from companies that engaged in divisional mergers to isolate liabilities within the past ten years, the bill would directly challenge J&J’s effort to separate its talc liabilities into a subsidiary and shield the parent company from lawsuits. Additionally, the legislation’s restriction on nonconsensual litigation shields and its requirement for explicit creditor consent would further weaken J&J’s ability to impose settlements on plaintiffs without their agreement. If this law had been in place, J&J’s controversial bankruptcy strategy would have never gotten off the ground.
December 3, 2024: The bankruptcy judge has ruled that baby powder lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson will remain on hold until mid-March. The pause allows J&J to pursue its bankruptcy strategy aimed at permanently resolving tens of thousands of injury claims.
During a hearing yesterday, the judge declined to either broaden the litigation freeze to include other entities allegedly involved or lift the block to allow some cases to proceed. J&J is proposing to pay over $8 billion to settle the claims through a corporate entity it created to absorb the lawsuits and file for bankruptcy.
December 2, 2024: The talcum powder MDL added only three new lawsuits in November, marking its slowest month in over a year. The total number of pending cases now stands at 58,201. Lawyers are focused more on the settlement of existing claims at this point, although our firm is still taking new cases.
November 14, 2024: The Department of Justice, through its bankruptcy monitor, the U.S. Trustee, is objecting to Johnson & Johnson’s choice of Jones Day as counsel for its subsidiary, Red River Talc LLC, in its bankruptcy case.
The U.S. Trustee objected, citing a conflict of interest, as Jones Day previously devised the “Texas Two-Step” tactic allowing companies to create a subsidiary burdened with liabilities to file for bankruptcy, shielding parent assets from mass tort claims. It will be interesting to see if a Trump administration will provide similar oversight, given the potential shift in regulatory focus that might deprioritize aggressive intervention in corporate restructuring cases like this one.
October 29, 2024: In January 2025, a federal judge in Houston will decide whether to approve J&J’s plan, which aims to resolve these claims efficiently after prior failed bankruptcy attempts in New Jersey. Most plaintiffs are really frustrated at how long this is taking.
October 15, 2024: Johnson & Johnson, along with several subsidiaries, was recently ordered to pay $15 million in damages in a mesothelioma lawsuit involving a real estate developer in Connecticut. The lawsuit held the company accountable for the plaintiff’s asbestos exposure, which led to the mesothelioma diagnosis.
October 12, 2024: The jury will deliberate in a Connecticut mesothelioma trial involving a Massachusetts real estate developer diagnosed with mesothelioma. His lawyers requested $30 million in damages from Johnson & Johnson; J&J suggested $4 million.
J&J’s defense denied liability, suggesting that his illness resulted from a genetic mutation rather than asbestos exposure. But J&J’s attorneys argued that if they were found responsible, the number should be more like $4 million. Let me tell you, a defense lawyer who offers a verdict amount in closing statements is a defense lawyer who does not expect to win.
October 9, 2024: A federal judge somehow in Texas somehow ruled that Johnson & Johnson (J&J) did not improperly manipulate bankruptcy laws by filing its insolvency case in Texas instead of its home state, New Jersey. This decision allows J&J to continue its efforts to settle thousands of lawsuits alleging its baby powder caused cancer. J&J has created a new separate bankruptcy subsidiary, Red River Talc, to take on the liability from these lawsuits and then filed for bankruptcy. It is the same old thing, the third time around.
The ruling is a significant victory for J&J. It wants to get this $8 billion or so settlement done that is said to be supported
Our legal team remains dedicated to keeping you informed about the twists and turns in the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation. Here are the recent updates:
September 30, 2024: The U.S. Trustee, acting as a bankruptcy system watchdog, filed a motion to transfer J&J’s third talc bankruptcy case from the Southern District of Texas to New Jersey. The Trustee accused J&J of “forum shopping” by filing in Texas through its subsidiary, Red River Talc LLC, arguing it’s an attempt to evade unfavorable rulings received in New Jersey with the previous LTL Management bankruptcy.
September 25, 2024: A Texas bankruptcy judge temporarily paused some talc lawsuits against J&J to address jurisdictional questions related to Red River Talc LLC’s Chapter 11 filing. The central issue is whether J&J will be permitted to pursue this bankruptcy strategy in Texas.
September 23, 2024: J&J’s talc unit, Red River Talc LLC, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy for the third time, announcing a “sort of” agreed-upon pre-packaged $8 billion settlement plan. J&J claimed this plan has the support of 83% of current talc injury plaintiffs and aims to resolve 99.75% of existing ovarian cancer claims, with mesothelioma lawsuits to be handled separately.
September 20, 2024: Despite settlement rumors ranging from $8.2 billion to $9.1 billion, details regarding payout specifics remain unclear, creating uncertainty for plaintiffs. The litigation continues to be described as a “circus.”
September 16, 2024: An Oregon state judge overturned a $260 million jury verdict against J&J in a mesothelioma case, granting J&J’s request for a new trial due to alleged legal errors. The plaintiff’s legal team intends to appeal.
September 12, 2024: A new mesothelioma trial began in Connecticut, where a 64-year-old plaintiff claimed his lifetime use of J&J’s talcum powder caused his cancer.
September 9, 2024: Reports indicated J&J planned to add $1.1 billion to the settlement, potentially bringing the total to over $9 billion to be paid out over 25 years.
August 22, 2024: J&J asked a federal judge to dismiss a proposed national class action seeking medical monitoring for talc product users. Concerns were raised about the limited individual compensation and the focus shifting away from those with diagnosed illnesses.
August 16, 2024: A South Carolina jury awarded over $63 million to a terminal lung cancer (mesothelioma) patient, finding both Johnson & Johnson and American International Industries negligent due to asbestos in J&J’s talc.
August 12, 2024: Unofficial reports suggested that over 75% of talc claimants voted in favor of the latest settlement plan at the end of July.
July 26, 2024: The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of LTL Management’s bankruptcy, stating it was not filed in good faith as the subsidiary was not financially distressed. J&J was expected to appeal to the Supreme Court.
July 25, 2024: Claimants had until the next day to vote on J&J’s proposed settlement plan, which offered approximately $6.475 billion over 25 years for ovarian cancer claims. Approval by at least 75% of voters would lead to a bankruptcy filing under “In re: Red River Talc LLC.”
July 9, 2024: A recent assessment by the World Health Organization indicated that exposure to talc in Johnson’s Baby Powder likely increases the risk of cancer, particularly ovarian cancer.
July 3, 2024: J&J proposed a $6.5 billion settlement for ovarian cancer lawsuits, contingent on 75% claimant agreement by the end of July. This development occurred amidst J&J’s legal disputes with plaintiff law firms and experts.
July 2, 2024: A New Jersey federal court judge ruled against J&J in its lawsuit against a medical expert, Jacqueline Moline, finding her statements regarding asbestos exposure and J&J’s baby powder protected by the First Amendment.
June 30, 2024: The MDL judge denied a motion for a temporary restraining order by some claimants, suggesting the court would likely allow J&J to pursue settlement through bankruptcy if an agreement was reached.
June 26, 2024: Predictions regarding the talc powder settlement were leaning towards completion, although some plaintiffs’ lawyers remained opposed.
June 13, 2024: Plaintiffs’ lawyers were divided on recommending J&J’s settlement offer to their clients, with the overall trend seemingly favoring the settlement.
June 10, 2024: J&J settled with 43 states and the District of Columbia for $700 million over the marketing of its talcum powder and agreed to cease marketing and manufacturing talc-based baby powder.
June 7, 2024: A new talc cancer trial began in Dallas, Texas, the first such trial in the state in some time. [Update: this case settled.]
June 4, 2024: An Oregon jury ordered J&J to pay $260 million to a woman with mesothelioma who attributed her cancer to lifelong use of the company’s baby powder, finding J&J liable and awarding both compensatory and punitive damages.
May 21, 2024: New research published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology supported the claims that J&J’s talc-based baby powder causes ovarian cancer, potentially impacting the ongoing settlement discussions.
May 1, 2024: J&J agreed to a $6.5 billion global settlement for the majority of ovarian cancer claims through its talcum spinoff subsidiary’s third bankruptcy attempt. The vote on this deal was set for July 26, 2024.
April 30, 2024: Plaintiffs’ attorneys challenged the MDL judge’s order for a complete resubmission of Daubert motions, arguing it lacked legal basis and appeared to be a tactic to pressure settlement.
April 22, 2024: J&J and Kenvue Inc. were ordered to pay $45 million to the family of a woman who died from mesothelioma linked to asbestos in talcum powder.
April 18, 2024: A Florida jury found J&J not responsible for a woman’s ovarian cancer, despite decades of baby powder use.
April 2, 2024: A new wrongful death lawsuit related to ovarian cancer and J&J’s baby powder began in Florida.
March 27, 2024: The MDL judge ordered a complete resubmission of Daubert motions, a decision seen by some as potentially delaying the litigation and pressuring settlement.
March 19, 2024: Plaintiffs’ lawyers opposed J&J’s attempt to quash a subpoena to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP regarding J&J’s talc liability and its removal from balance sheets.
March 6, 2024: A Florida judge declared a mistrial in an ovarian cancer case against J&J after the jury was unable to reach a verdict.
March 1, 2024: J&J’s Chief Medical Officer testified in a Miami trial that the company found no evidence linking baby powder to ovarian cancer.
February 14, 2024: A new trial began in Miami, focusing on allegations that J&J knew for decades about the potential cancer risks of its baby powder.
February 10, 2024: New deadlines were set in the MDL, indicating that a subsequent talc powder trial in the MDL was likely towards the end of the year at the earliest.
February 5, 2024: J&J continued its strategy of challenging plaintiffs’ experts and lawyers through subpoenas and other legal maneuvers.
January 23, 2024: J&J offered $6.9 billion to settle over 50,000 ovarian cancer claims, with mesothelioma claims being handled separately.
January 11, 2024: J&J reached a $700 million settlement with numerous states over deceptive marketing of its talcum powder, seen by some as a positive step towards a global settlement.
January 3, 2024: J&J investors filed a class action lawsuit alleging misleading statements regarding product safety and research commitments related to talc.
Our legal team remains dedicated to keeping you informed about the twists and turns in the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation. Here are the recent updates from 2023:
December 23, 2023: J&J accused a plaintiffs’ law firm of an inappropriate relationship with a former J&J attorney, alleging the use of confidential information. The law firm refuted these claims, stating J&J’s motion was a deflection from their handling of talc injury claims.
December 19, 2023: J&J sought to disqualify a plaintiffs’ attorney and law firm from the MDL due to the attorney’s partnership with a former lawyer who previously worked on J&J’s defense in talc litigation, citing potential conflict of interest regarding a proposed $19 billion settlement.
December 8, 2023: Bloomberg reported on an attorney proposing a $19 billion settlement for all current and future talc lawsuits. The plan involved his company buying J&J units to manage claims. J&J denounced the plan due to conflicts of interest. The $19 billion figure suggested a potential average settlement of $200,000, but the feasibility and timeline remained uncertain.
December 5, 2023: J&J actively sought to settle lawsuits linking its talc-based Baby Powder to asbestos-caused cancers to avoid 2024 jury trials. Despite this, J&J still aimed for a third bankruptcy filing to resolve over 50,000 ovarian cancer talc lawsuits, a strategy deemed unlikely to succeed.
November 17, 2023: J&J settled two talc trials for undisclosed amounts, one mid-trial and another after jury selection. A third trial in Seattle was postponed.
November 7, 2023: J&J considered a third Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the Fifth Circuit’s Southern District of Texas for its LTL unit to resolve talc cancer lawsuits, after two failed attempts in New Jersey due to the Third Circuit’s ruling on insufficient financial distress. This third attempt was also predicted to be unsuccessful.
November 1, 2023: The MDL judge issued a new scheduling order for six bellwether trials, aiming to restart progress in the talcum powder class action after delays caused by J&J’s failed bankruptcy attempts. These cases involved allegations of cancer from asbestos in J&J’s Shower-to-Shower product.
October 3, 2023: An appeals court overturned a $223 million jury award to baby powder users, citing improper scientific testimony. The case was expected to be retried.
September 21, 2023: The new MDL judge indicated the need for another “Science Day” to educate the court on the complex scientific and medical issues central to the talc litigation. This event was anticipated for November or December.
September 1, 2023: J&J sought to reargue expert witness challenges already decided by the retired previous MDL judge, a tactic seen as a delay.
August 14, 2023: A New Jersey bankruptcy judge dismissed J&J’s talc subsidiary’s second bankruptcy case but did not prohibit future filings.
August 15, 2023: The bankruptcy judge ruled that J&J and its subsidiary, LTL Management, could attempt a third bankruptcy filing, despite the dismissal of the second. J&J did not comment on whether it would do so.
August 4, 2023: The bankruptcy judge dismissed a motion to bar attorney Randi S. Ellis from representing future mesothelioma claimants, calling the request baseless.
August 1, 2023: Following the dismissal of its second bankruptcy attempt, J&J was expected to explore other legal options, including individual settlements, negotiations with law firms, or a global settlement. Individual settlements with law firms were considered the most likely path.
July 29, 2023: J&J’s second attempt to resolve talc injury claims through Chapter 11 bankruptcy was dismissed by a New Jersey bankruptcy judge due to insufficient financial distress. This was expected to increase plaintiffs’ leverage in settlement negotiations.
July 21, 2023: J&J proposed an $8.9 billion global settlement for talc lawsuits, with support from a significant portion of plaintiffs. However, an $18.8 million verdict in a California talc trial was seen as potentially undermining this settlement push.
July 19, 2023: A California jury awarded $18.8 million to a man with mesothelioma allegedly caused by long-term use of J&J’s Baby Powder.
July 16, 2023: A law firm representing mesothelioma patients sought to disqualify attorney Randi S. Ellis from representing future claimants in J&J’s bankruptcy case due to alleged impropriety related to meetings with J&J’s negotiators.
July 11, 2023: Closing arguments concluded in a California baby powder asbestos lawsuit, with the plaintiff seeking significant compensatory and punitive damages, arguing J&J ignored early evidence of asbestos in its talc.
July 10, 2023: J&J’s bankrupt talc unit sued three plaintiff expert doctors, alleging they harmed its business by publishing articles linking talc to mesothelioma using “junk science.”
June 28, 2023: J&J’s bankrupt talc unit went to trial on motions to dismiss its Chapter 11 case, with executives testifying about J&J’s financial support for an $8.9 billion settlement proposal. The court’s decision remained unclear but dismissal was considered likely.
June 27, 2023: In a California mesothelioma trial, the plaintiff testified about the devastating impact of his cancer diagnosis, attributed to lifelong use of J&J’s baby powder.
June 14, 2023: A New Jersey bankruptcy judge delayed key decisions in J&J’s talc subsidiary’s Chapter 11 case, awaiting a trial before ruling on ending LTL’s exclusive right to propose a plan. The proposed $8.9 billion settlement was considered unlikely to gain sufficient victim approval.
June 2, 2023: Technical issues disrupted opening statements in a California asbestos talc trial, where J&J’s lawyer expressed skepticism about early science indicating asbestos in their product.
June 1, 2023: The first trial since J&J’s talc division bankruptcy filing began in California, involving a young mesothelioma plaintiff. The trial was seen as potentially impacting J&J’s proposed $8.9 billion settlement.
May 31, 2023: J&J’s bankrupt talc unit defended its second Chapter 11 filing, highlighting J&J’s $8.9 billion commitment and claiming support from firms representing over 60,000 claimants, a claim considered potentially inaccurate.
May 24, 2023: The first trial concerning asbestos in J&J’s cosmetic talc since its 2021 bankruptcy filing was set to begin jury selection in California.
May 22, 2023: Lawyers in J&J’s second talc bankruptcy battled over the appointment of the future claims representative, with objections raised against the reappointment of Randi Ellis due to alleged conflicts of interest. The bankruptcy itself was considered likely to be dismissed.
May 17, 2023: J&J’s talc bankruptcy unit stated it designated $400 million for state deceptive advertising claims, making it an $8.5 billion settlement for cancer victims. The feasibility of pushing these settlements through at these figures was questioned, with the average settlement per case estimated at around $100,000, considered insufficient.
May 15, 2023: An advocacy group for cancer victims considered suing J&J, alleging intentional withdrawal of a $61.5 billion funding agreement to simulate financial distress for its subsidiary’s bankruptcy filing.
May 10, 2023: The bankruptcy court ordered both sides in J&J’s subsidiary’s second bankruptcy filing to participate in settlement mediation.
May 5, 2023: Talc supplier Whittaker, Clark & Daniels filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy due to numerous lawsuits alleging its talc products caused cancer from asbestos exposure, following a $29 million verdict against the company.
May 4, 2023: The bankruptcy judge directed J&J to restart settlement discussions with lawyers who rejected the proposed $8.9 billion settlement offer, suggesting more money was needed to resolve the claims.
May 1, 2023: The $8.9 billion settlement offer was considered by some to be insufficient given the number of victims and the outcomes of recent talc trials with significant verdicts for plaintiffs.
April 30, 2023: J&J increased its settlement offer to $8.9 billion if talc plaintiffs allowed a bankruptcy settlement, gaining support from a segment of plaintiffs and lawyers. However, the 75% approval needed for bankruptcy plan approval remained a challenge.
April 25, 2023: Talc cancer claimants asked a judge to dismiss LTL Management LLC’s second bankruptcy case, arguing the company was not financially distressed. Plaintiffs’ lawyers and victims were divided over the $8.9 billion settlement offer.
April 21, 2023: A bankruptcy judge ruled that J&J must face new lawsuits alleging tainted baby powder caused cancer, expressing skepticism over J&J’s second bankruptcy strategy.
April 13, 2023: Plaintiffs’ lawyers and victims held differing views on J&J’s $8.9 billion settlement offer, with some arguing it was insufficient for the number of victims, while others favored it due to the desire for immediate compensation.
April 12, 2023: J&J argued its second bankruptcy filing was necessary to equitably and efficiently resolve current and future talc lawsuits, claiming revised financing addressed the 3rd Circuit’s concerns about the first filing. Attorneys opposing the agreement argued J&J fraudulently transferred assets. The bankruptcy was largely seen as a tactic to pressure acceptance of the $8.9 billion settlement.
April 10, 2023: Bloomberg reported on a new New Jersey law requiring disclosure of litigation funding, noting the involvement of funders in talc claims against J&J, which was offering an $8.9 billion settlement.
April 4, 2023: The Third Circuit denied J&J’s request to continue the automatic stay on talc lawsuits while it appealed a bankruptcy ruling, allowing thousands of cases and new filings to proceed.
Our legal team remains dedicated to keeping you informed about the twists and turns in the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation. Here are the recent updates:
April 4, 2023: The Third Circuit denied J&J’s request to continue the automatic stay on talc lawsuits while J&J appeals a bankruptcy ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. The automatic stay had frozen thousands of cases since J&J’s controversial effort to spin off talc liabilities into a bankrupt subsidiary.
April 1, 2023: Johnson & Johnson announced its plan to appeal its 3rd Circuit bankruptcy loss to the U.S. Supreme Court. The likelihood of the Supreme Court hearing the appeal was considered low.
February 25, 2023: A congressman from Tennessee called for a GAO investigation into the cost of J&J talc products to the U.S. government, accusing J&J of ignoring product dangers while taxpayer money funded treatment for related injuries.
February 14, 2023: A U.S. Bankruptcy Judge in New Jersey announced his intention to dismiss J&J’s bankruptcy case following the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling.
February 8, 2023: U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp was appointed to preside over the talc powder MDL following the retirement of Judge Freda L. Wolfson.
January 31, 2023: Information regarding our post on the 3rd Circuit baby powder bankruptcy ruling.
January 30, 2023: The Third Circuit rejected J&J’s attempt to use bankruptcy to offload its talcum powder liabilities, dismissing the Chapter 11 filing of a subsidiary created for this purpose. J&J’s stock dropped, and the company vowed to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
January 2, 2023: A prediction that the 3rd Circuit would reject J&J’s bankruptcy strategy in February, followed by an appeal to the Supreme Court, but eventual large-scale settlements.
December 25, 2022: Observation that the 3rd Circuit oral arguments on J&J’s bankruptcy appeal were well-argued on both sides, with skepticism from the judges regarding J&J’s strategy.
December 22, 2022: Information on hair relaxer lawsuits being filed by women claiming injuries, including ovarian cancer, with a note of relevance to the talcum powder litigation due to the shared injury type.
October 1, 2022: Recommendation of a New Yorker article about J&J as a good read.
September 27, 2022: Note that the mediator involved in facilitating a settlement was instructed to report to the judge soon.
September 20, 2022: Report on a 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals hearing where judges appeared skeptical of J&J’s argument that its bankruptcy filing was not primarily for a litigation advantage, raising concerns about similar filings by solvent companies. The ruling’s impact on talcum powder settlement amounts was noted.
It is NOT too late to file your talcum powder lawsuit – at least not for many of you. If you used a talcum powder product for an extended period and were subsequently diagnosed with ovarian cancer, contact us online.
