Welcome to Law.com Class Actions: Critical Mass, a weekly briefing for class action and mass tort attorneys.
This week: The U.S. Trustee, insurance firms and lawyers for talc claimants objected to Johnson & Johnson’s proposed $10 billion bankruptcy plan. Southern California Edison faces about 30 lawsuits over the Eaton fire, but at least three cases target the City of Los Angeles over the Palisades fire. Find out who got appointed to handle PFAS class actions over Band-Aids.
I’m Amanda Bronstad. Feel free to reach out to me with your input. My email is [email protected]. Follow me on LinkedIn or X: @abronstadlaw.
Purdue Pops Up in Talc Bankruptcy Objections
TheU.S. Trustee, several insurance firms and a coalition of talc claimants objected toJohnson & Johnson’s proposed $10 billion bankruptcy plan ahead of a key Feb. 18 hearing.
Here’s my coverage of the objections, which cite the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling that dismantled Purdue Pharma’s $6 billion bankruptcy plan by invalidating nonconsensual releases granted to the Sacklers, who founded the opioid drug manufacturer. The releases and injunctions are the same for Johnson & Johnson, whose subsidiary Red River Talc filed the Chapter 11 case last year, according to the talc objections.
Johnson & Johnson Worldwide Vice President of Litigation Erik Haas disagreed, stating that the Purdue decision actually validates the talc bankruptcy plan.
But there are other arguments, many of which are contained in the motions to dismiss the talc bankruptcy, such as allegations of Johnson & Johnson’s bad faith and Red River’s lack of financial distress. Objections also repeated criticisms of the solicitation process that Johnson & Johnson claimed gave its plan the support of 83% of talc claimants. The U.S. Trustee’s Office, in its objection, added new concerns about solicitation occurring last month, citing a Dec. 19 email to plaintiffs’ firms from Johnson & Johnson attorney Jim Murdica (Barnes & Thornburg) that touted “substantial improvements” to the plan.
In a Jan. 28 filing, 26 plaintiffs’ firms joined the Coalition of Counsel for Justice for Talc Claimants in objecting to the plan. They include Bernstein Liebhard, Goza & Honnold, Hilliard Law, Saltz Mongeluzzi and Wagstaff & Cartmell.
‘Arcing and Sparking’: Wildfires Take Different Paths
As the number of lawsuits filed against Southern California Edison over the Eaton fire jumps to 30, some plaintiffs’ lawyers are suing over the Palisades fire.
Both wildfires ripped through Southern California starting on Jan. 7, causing the destruction of more than 16,000 structures and 29 deaths. At least three lawsuits have been filed against the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power for failing to have a 117 million-gallon reservoir available when firefighters faced the Palisades wildfire. But unlike Southern California Edison, neither defendant, as government agencies, can be held liable under California law for failing to provide fire protection. So, the suits only allege inverse condemnation—not negligence or punitive damages.
Meanwhile, in the Eaton fire litigation, plaintiffs’ firm Edelson was back in court on Monday after discovery unearthed this video from a gas station’s security camera of the Eaton fire “arcing and sparking” before exploding on Jan. 7. A Los Angeles judge extended his temporary restraining order for Southern California Edison to preserve evidence through Feb. 18.
In court documents, Southern California Edison attorneys at Hueston Hennigan criticized Edelson for its overbroad discovery requests. Ali Moghaddas (Edelson) wrote in a Monday update:
“Defendants have repeatedly endeavored to mislead the public about the cause of the fire, first by having Edison International CEO falsely claim that they had not detected any electrical anomalies on its equipment leading up to Eaton fire, and then by suggesting that a homeless encampment might be to blame. But our justice system is a public one.”
Who Gets the Work?
A federal judge named four lawyers as interim class counsel in three consolidated lawsuits over a “forever chemical” in Band-Aids. On Jan. 22, U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp, in the District of New Jersey, appointed Christopher Ayers (Seeger Weiss), James Cecchi (Carella Byrne), Joshua Arisohn (Bursor & Fisher) and E. Powell Miller (Miller Law). He also appointed a plaintiffs’ executive committee: Charles Schaffer (Levin Sedran), Jason Sultzer (Sultzer & Lipari), Kristen Cardoso (Kopelowitz Ostrow) and James Bilsborrow (Weitz & Luxenberg). The lawsuits allege that Johnson & Johnson and its spin-off company, Kenvue, sold Band-Aid bandages containing unsafe levels of PFAS.
Here’s what else is happening:
Purdue 2.0: Attorneys general from 15 states announced a new $7.4 billion opioid settlement with Purdue Pharma and its founders, the Sacklers, after the U.S. Supreme Court upended a prior deal. The new deal includes $6.5 billion from the Sacklers and no nonconsensual releases, which the Supreme Court invalidated in a 5-4 ruling last year in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma. It also provides $3.1 billion in additional payments than the original 2021 deal.
Uber Upended: The Nevada Supreme Court struck down an Uber-backed ballot initiative designed to cap contingency fees in the state’s civil cases at 20%. Monday’s unanimous opinion found that the description of the initiative’s effect was “legally insufficient” and “misleading and confusing.” Uber, which faces 250 sexual assault cases in multidistrict litigation in California’s Northern District, bankrolled $5 million to support the measure, proposed by Nevadans for Fair Recovery. Two other groups, Uber Sexual Assault Survivors for Legal Accountability and the Nevada Justice Association, represented by Deepak Gupta (Gupta Wessler), sued last year to challenge the measure, which was slated to go on the 2026 ballot.
Damages Dispute: Plaintiffs’ lawyers have asked for a new talc trial after a jury in Pittsburgh returned a defense verdict earlier this month for Johnson & Johnson but awarded their client $22 million in punitive damages. Jurors in Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Jan. 6 found Johnson & Johnson had acted negligently, but its conduct was not the cause of Michaeleen Lee’s death from mesothelioma. Jessica Dean (Dean Omar), who represented Lee, said the judge did not seek out more clarity from the jury following the verdict.
Thanks for reading Critical Mass! I’ll be back next week.
