Fulvio Italiani and Carlos Omaña, D'Empaire
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Brian Bolin, Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Luke A Barefoot and Benjamin S Beller, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Ronit J Berkovich and Olga F Peshko, Weil Gotshal & Manges
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Timothy Graulich and Elliot Moskowitz, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Fernando Daniel Hernandez, Marval O’Farrell & Mairal
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Recently, Johnson & Johnson (J&J)—one of the most-recognizable companies in the world—has found itself the target of numerous product liability actions across the nation, defending itself against claims by plaintiffs alleging that J&J products caused them to develop cancer. Overwhelmingly, the cases have been brought by women who have developed ovarian cancer, but there also is a spate of cases that claim J&J’s products caused the plaintiff to develop mesothelioma.
Defendants Honeywell and Ford Motor appealed the District Court’s decision affirming the denial of “unconditional access” to numerous exhibits submitted in connection with “administering nine asbestos bankruptcies.” The court had previously permitted review of the documents for three months with certain limitations.
NORTH CAROLINA – Asbestos claimants (claimants committee) in this Chapter 11 case filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy case filed by Georgia Pacific (GP) for its acquisition of Bestwall arguing that the petition was filed in bad faith and established a reorganization that was “objectively futile.”
Asbestos litigation has been consistently active throughout the United States since the first asbestos lawsuit was filed in the 1970s. As the population of asbestos plaintiffs has grown over the last 40 years, so have the funds paid by various asbestos defendants. This growing financial burden has caused numerous asbestos defendants to file for bankruptcy. In doing so, the insolvent defendants are required to create asbestos trust funds for the protection of future asbestos plaintiffs. To date, there are over 50 active asbestos bankruptcy trusts in the U.S.