VIDEO – BIG PHARMA FELONS –
March 31, 2025 – J&J said in a statement that it would not appeal, but also that it had no intention of settling the claims and would instead “return to the tort system to litigate and defeat these meritless talc claims.”
Andy Birchfield, an attorney who represents plaintiffs opposed to the bankruptcy settlement, said that J&J’s bankruptcy strategy was “nothing more than a bad-faith maneuver to avoid full accountability.” J&J had argued that the third proposal, in Texas bankruptcy court, should succeed because there was more money on the table and the deal was supported by a majority of cancer victims who voted on it.
Lopez criticized the votes that J&J collected from plaintiffs’ attorneys, saying there were serious flaws in votes cast both for and against the plan. J&J collected 90,000 votes, saying it had 83% of plaintiffs’ support, but Lopez said that “at least half should not be counted.” Some lawyers voted on their clients’ behalf without having clear authority to do so, and others said they had obtained their clients’ consent but did not present proof that they had spoken with them, Lopez said.
J&J “unnecessarily rushed” the votes, and plaintiffs’ lawyers testified that they were forced to cast votes on their clients’ behalf instead of allowing them to vote directly, according to Lopez’s opinion.
