Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is deep in negotiations with opposing attorneys in an effort to solidify a $6.48 billion global settlement over claims that its talc products, including its iconic baby powder, caused cancer. The company is trying to sway holdout plaintiffs who have resisted the proposed settlement, which J&J aims to finalize through the bankruptcy of a subsidiary.
While the majority of claimants have already shown support for the settlement, J&J has temporarily paused the vote count to rally additional support from those who have been hesitant. Erik Haas, J&J’s worldwide vice president of litigation, stated that the company agreed to a brief extension of the certification timeline to give plaintiffs’ lawyers more time to discuss the deal with their clients.
Despite these negotiations, there remains significant opposition. Andy Birchfield, a prominent attorney who has been a vocal critic of the proposed settlement, expressed a willingness to engage in talks but made it clear that he is prepared to oppose any further bankruptcy filings. Birchfield emphasized that the primary goal is fair and timely compensation for victims, and warned that if J&J continues to pursue bankruptcy as a strategy, he and his clients will challenge it.
J&J’s settlement proposal hinges on securing the approval of at least 75% of the talc claimants. If successful, the subsidiary’s bankruptcy would bring an end to all lawsuits related to allegations that J&J’s talc products caused ovarian cancer, while also preventing new cases from emerging.
J&J currently faces lawsuits from over 62,000 plaintiffs, all alleging that its talc products were contaminated with asbestos, leading to ovarian and other cancers. The company maintains that its products are safe, free of asbestos, and do not cause cancer. The ongoing settlement talks focus primarily on claims involving ovarian and gynecological cancers, building on a previous settlement outside of Chapter 11 that addressed lawsuits alleging the talc caused mesothelioma, a deadly form of cancer linked to asbestos exposure.
J&J’s strategy of using a subsidiary’s bankruptcy to resolve these claims aims to consolidate all plaintiffs into a single settlement, while shielding the parent company from filing for bankruptcy itself. In bankruptcy proceedings, judges have the power to enforce global settlements that permanently halt related lawsuits and prevent new ones from being filed.
However, outside of bankruptcy, even if J&J reaches settlements with some plaintiffs, holdouts or future claimants could still bring lawsuits, leaving the company vulnerable to massive verdicts—like the $2.12 billion awarded to 22 women who linked their ovarian cancer to asbestos in J&J talc.
As J&J navigates these legal challenges, the stakes remain high, with the potential for far-reaching implications for the company and the thousands of individuals affected by its products.
