J&J talc settlement sign-ups reach 87.5%, short of the 95% needed

Where the sign-ups stand

Lead plaintiffs' counsel told a federal magistrate judge earlier in October that 313 firms with 66,500 talc clients had signed on, Law.com reported. That is about 87.5% of the roughly 76,000 claims the settlement covers. J&J needs law firms representing 95% of ovarian cancer claimants in state and federal courts to accept before the agreement takes effect, the company said when it announced the deal on 27 July.

The unsigned remainder is about 9,500 claimants. The Legal Examiner reported that roughly 3,800 plaintiffs opting out would be enough to push participation below 95%, which could collapse the deal or force a renegotiation.

The headline figure is also contested. Law.com's 19 October report described a $5.8bn global settlement, while J&J and most other outlets put it at $5.5bn.

What claimants get

J&J will pay up to $3bn in 2027 and owes no further payments before 2028. A point-based matrix assigns values to individual claims and does not cap the total payout, Chris Seeger, a plaintiffs' lawyer who helped negotiate the deal, told CNN. Seeger, who represents about 2,500 clients with talc claims, has said J&J could ultimately pay $7bn or more.

Claimants who accept give up the right to sue J&J, its talc suppliers and the retailers that sold the products, according to The Legal Examiner. The agreement covers only existing claims, not future lawsuits. Seeger said that excluding future claims made more money available to current plaintiffs and should get all claims paid within 18 months rather than over more than a decade.

Why J&J settled

The proposal followed a 22 July ruling by US Magistrate Judge Rukhsanah Singh in the New Jersey multidistrict litigation. Singh ordered plaintiffs to show why the talc cases should not be dismissed after lead plaintiffs' lawyers withdrew their two key specific causation experts from bellwether cases, Law.com reported.

Earlier attempts to contain the liability failed. Three bankruptcies by J&J subsidiaries were dismissed, and a US bankruptcy judge rejected a $9bn settlement proposed by subsidiary Red River Talc, the Altoona Mirror reported.

Erik Haas, J&J's worldwide vice president of litigation, said the company was confident it "would have ultimately prevailed with further litigation" and that the resolution lets it "remain focused on its mission to develop medicines and devices that save lives". J&J denies its talc caused cancer.

Trials continue

A new talc trial opened on Monday 19 October in Massachusetts' Suffolk County Superior Court over Winifred Haddad's mesothelioma, a different cancer from the ovarian claims in the settlement. A Missouri woman sued J&J and supplier Imerys Talc America on 3 August in Jackson County Circuit Court over ovarian cancer. A Louisiana jury awarded $10m to the family of Lynne Roy, with J&J's individual share just over $1.2m.

What happens next

The deal becomes final only if firms representing 95% of ovarian cancer claimants accept it. If it closes, it resolves 99.75% of talc litigation in federal and state courts, according to Law.com.