Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Case in other court:

Track this case

Case Number:

3:16-md-02738

Court:

New Jersey

Nature of Suit:

367 Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability

Multi Party Litigation:

Multi-district Litigation

Judge:

Judge Michael A. Shipp

Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

Sectors & Industries:

  1. June 02, 2025

    J&J Again Seeks To Block Beasley Allen In NJ Talc Litigation

    Johnson & Johnson has opposed a New Jersey talc claimant's motion for the pro hac vice admission of two attorneys from The Beasley Allen Law Firm, claiming the partners' conduct in its talc unit's bankruptcy proceedings warrants denial of the application.

  2. September 23, 2024

    J&J Accuses Beasley Allen Of Casting Bogus Talc Ballots

    Johnson & Johnson has accused the Beasley Allen Law Firm of casting about two dozen false ballots against the company's latest talc bankruptcy plan without voters' consent and urged a New Jersey federal court to remove the firm from the plaintiff's steering committee as a consequence.

  3. August 13, 2024

    'Clever' Scheme Is Concealing Talc Litigation Funding, J&J Says

    The Beasley Allen Law Firm needs to disclose alleged litigation funding fueling its litigation over Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder even if that funding was not given directly to the firm since the disclosure rules apply to "parties" and not "law firms," J&J has told a New Jersey federal court.

  4. August 07, 2024

    Law Firms Fight J&J Bid To Revive Talc Subpoenas

    The Beasley Allen Law Firm, the steering committee of talc plaintiffs suing Johnson & Johnson, and a third-party law firm urged the New Jersey federal court this week to reject a bid from the pharmaceutical company to reinstate subpoenas seeking evidence of alleged third-party litigation funding.

  5. July 22, 2024

    Lack Of 'Smoking Gun' Sinks J&J's Bid To DQ Beasley Allen

    The Beasley Allen Law Firm may represent plaintiffs in multicounty talc injury litigation in New Jersey state court, after a judge found Johnson & Johnson failed to show a former Faegre Drinker outside counsel shared information he learned representing the company in earlier talc litigation.

  6. July 11, 2024

    Talc Law Firms Beat J&J Subpoenas Seeking Funding Info

    The Beasley Allen Law Firm, another plaintiffs law firm and a litigation funder defeated subpoenas from Johnson & Johnson in talc litigation, with a special master reasoning that the broad swath of discovery permitted in federal courts still has limits. 

  7. July 02, 2024

    Beasley Allen Slams J&J's DQ Bid 'Check-Up' In Talc Tort

    The Beasley Allen Law Firm and Johnson & Johnson continue to spar over the firm and attorney Andy Birchfield's role in long-running federal and state mass torts over talcum powder injuries, with the firm calling out J&J on Tuesday for "prodding" the New Jersey courts to boot the lawyers from the litigation.

  8. June 18, 2024

    J&J Fights Law Firm's Bid To Nix Subpoenas In Talc Brawl

    Information about the Beasley Allen Law Firm's litigation funding and settlement communications is relevant and necessary to resolving long-running multidistrict litigation over Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products and so should be turned over, the pharmaceutical giant has told a New Jersey federal court.

  9. June 06, 2024

    Law Firm Says Axe 'Draconian' J&J Subpoena In Talc Claim

    A Mississippi plaintiffs firm urged a New Jersey federal court on Thursday to quash a subpoena served by Johnson & Johnson requesting that the firm turn over documents related to litigation funding and its communication with media outlets, calling the subpoena "draconian" and improper as the firm is not a party to the pharmaceutical giant's current personal injury litigation surrounding its talcum powder products.

  10. May 31, 2024

    Beasley Allen Wants J&J Subpoenas Nixed Amid Ethics Fight

    The Beasley Allen Law Firm and a plaintiff steering committee in the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation blasted subpoenas directed at the firm and others aimed at turning up evidence of an alleged scheme to muster opposition to J&J's latest $6.5 billion bankruptcy plan.