Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

In re Removed State Court Talc Actions Against Johnson & Johnson, CV 19-03124-CJC (JCx) (2019)

Court: District Court, C.D. California Number: infdco20190531893 Visitors: 5
Filed: May 30, 2019
Latest Update: May 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER REMANDING REMAINING TALC ACTIONS TO STATE COURT CORMAC J. CARNEY , District Judge . Thousands of plaintiffs across the country have filed personal injury lawsuits alleging injury and wrongful death caused by exposure to asbestos from the talc used in Johnson & Johnson's products. Johnson & Johnson has removed many of these actions to federal court on the basis that they are related to the pending bankruptcy proceeding of its sole talc supplier, Imerys Talc America, Inc. In this distri
More

ORDER REMANDING REMAINING TALC ACTIONS TO STATE COURT

Thousands of plaintiffs across the country have filed personal injury lawsuits alleging injury and wrongful death caused by exposure to asbestos from the talc used in Johnson & Johnson's products. Johnson & Johnson has removed many of these actions to federal court on the basis that they are related to the pending bankruptcy proceeding of its sole talc supplier, Imerys Talc America, Inc. In this district, courts have remanded over one hundred of these cases on equitable grounds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1452(b). The substantial majority of the remaining removed cases have been transferred to this Court.

The Court issued an order to show cause why the forty-two removed actions before it as of May 6, 2019 (the "OSC Talc Actions") should not be remanded on equitable grounds. After giving the plaintiffs and Johnson & Johnson an opportunity to be heard, the Court ordered those forty-two actions remanded. Johnson & Johnson's basis for removing the remaining eighteen (18) talc actions before the Court is the same. The equitable grounds for remanding those remaining actions are substantially similar, if not the same, as the grounds listed in the Court's Order Remanding the OSC Talc Actions and its prior individual remand orders. Accordingly, the remaining eighteen (18) removed talc actions before the Court are hereby REMANDED to state court. Any motions or ex parte applications to remand that are pending in those actions are DENIED AS MOOT, and the hearings vacated.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer