Bla­tant abuse of Chap­ter 11? J&J says its use of 'Texas two-step' is all about fair­ness

As a five-day tri­al over John­son & John­son’s con­tro­ver­sial talc bank­rupt­cy wrapped up last week, the phar­ma gi­ant had a fi­nal ar­gu­ment to make: That plain­tiffs’ at­tor­neys have a “per­verse in­cen­tive” be­hind their re­jec­tion of the phar­ma gi­ant’s bank­rupt­cy strat­e­gy.

The case stems from 38,000 law­suits claim­ing J&J’s wide­ly used ba­by pow­der and oth­er talc prod­ucts con­tained as­bestos and caused mesothe­lioma and ovar­i­an can­cer. As cas­es mount­ed, J&J at­tempt­ed to dig it­self out by spin­ning the talc-re­lat­ed li­a­bil­i­ties in­to a new com­pa­ny called LTL Man­age­ment, which then filed for bank­rupt­cy.

Endpoints News

Unlock this article instantly by becoming a free subscriber.

You’ll get access to free articles each month, plus you can customize what newsletters get delivered to your inbox each week, including breaking news.