J&J Loses Bid to Send Talc Case, Set for First Phila. Trial, to Federal Court
U.S. District Judge Mark Kearney of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Tuesday remanded the case to the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, denying arguments from the pharmaceutical giant that the case needed to be sent to bankruptcy court in Delaware.
June 12, 2019 at 12:51 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge has rejected Johnson & Johnson's efforts to remove to federal court a lawsuit that is set to be the first talc-related case to come before a Philadelphia jury.
U.S. District Judge Mark Kearney of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Tuesday remanded the case Kleiner v. Rite Aid to the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, denying arguments from the pharmaceutical giant that the case needed to be sent to bankruptcy court in Delaware.
J&J, which has been slammed with verdicts as high as $4.7 billion over its talc products, had argued that indemnifications and shared insurance it has with its talc supplier, Imerys, meant that thousands of talc cases needed to be handled in federal bankruptcy court because, earlier this year, Imerys filed for bankruptcy.
Kearney, however, in a 14-page opinion, agreed with the plaintiff, Ellen Kleiner, that her case linking talcum powder to her ovarian cancer was not sufficiently “related to” the pending bankruptcy, since any indemnification enforcement would need to be pursued through separate litigation.
“Johnson & Johnson emphasizes the initial sentences of the indemnification clauses providing for indemnification. But it fails to account for the glaring qualifications of those obligations,” Kearney said, noting language in their agreements that say Imerys does not need to indemnify J&J for liabilities arising from its own acts or omissions. “This qualified language does not evince the parties' intent to extend automatic indemnity where Johnson & Johnson's own acts or omissions are the subject of litigation. … [I]ts claim can only be vindicated through a second lawsuit.”
Kleiner is being represented by Nancy Winkler and Todd Schoenhaus from Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg, & Jeck, as well as Ted Meadows of Beasley Allen. In an emailed statement, Winkler noted previous attempts by J&J to remove the case to federal court, and said that, with this ruling, there should be no more delays.
“We are so pleased that Mrs. Kleiner will be able to move forward to trial before a jury in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas and obtain justice,” Winkler said. “We hope that other judges in the Eastern District and across the country follow Judge Kearney and numerous other judges who have remanded cases, and remand the cases of these brave women to state court so their cases can be tried without delay.”
A message to J&J's press office was not immediately returned Wednesday morning.
Kleiner's case is one of 2,400 lawsuits from across the country that J&J removed to federal court in April, citing the Chapter 11 bankruptcy that Imerys Talc America filed in February. Imerys is J&J's exclusive supplier of talc.
In its efforts to remove the cases to federal courts, J&J pointed to the federal bankruptcy statute, which, J&J said, gives the Delaware federal court the authority to determine the proper venue for civil claims “related to” Imerys' bankruptcy. Because its contracts with Imerys contained indemnifications and the supplier also sought to claim J&J's insurance for expenses incurred in defending the talc cases, the entire talc litigation, J&J contended, should be considered “related to” bankruptcy, since Imerys' pool of available assets could also be affected.
Plaintiffs successfully pushed back against defense bids to remove the cases.
In his opinion, Kearney said U.S. District Judge Arthur Schwab of the Western District of Pennsylvania recently granted a similar motion to remand to state court.
“Johnson & Johnson has not shown our 'related-to' jurisdiction over the Kleiners' long pending product liability case set for trial in January 2020,” Kearney said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All3rd Circuit Revives Class Action Against Bayer Over Benzene-Contaminated Products
4 minute readLife Sciences M&A Set to Boom, Litigation to Remain Steady Under New Trump Admin
5 minute readOzempic Plaintiffs Push for Marketing Discovery After MDL Judge Imposes Limits
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
- 2Attracted to Thompson Hine's Fee Flexibility, Morgan Lewis Litigator Switches Firms in Chicago
- 3Phila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
- 4Simpson Thacher Replenishes London Ranks With Latest Linklaters Defection
- 5Holland & Knight, Akin, Crowell, Barnes and Day Pitney Add to DC Practices
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250