What We’re Reading This Week [November 15, 2021]
Reporting from the Wall Street Journal indicates that plaintiffs in price fixing lawsuits against generic drugmaker Teligent Inc. have sought court authority to continue that litigation despite Teligent’s October bankruptcy filing. The litigation, which commenced in 2016, alleges that Teligent artificially inflated the costs of certain generic drugs and is being pursued primarily by attorneys general for 54 states, territories, and commonwealths. [WSJ; Nov. 11, 2021]
Reuters reports on the decision by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Craig Whitley to transfer Johnson & Johnson subsidiary LTL Management’s bankruptcy case from North Carolina to New Jersey. Judge Whitley determined that New Jersey is the proper forum for the case, since Johnson & Johnson is based in the state and because much of talc litigation involving Johnson & Johnson is pending there. In at least a temporary reprieve for Johnson & Johnson, Judge Whitley did stay all personal injury claims against Johnson & Johnson – and not just those against LTL Management – for 60 days. But the judge emphasized that he was doing so only so that the case could be transferred in an orderly manner without it being “on fire” in the recipient, the New Jersey bankruptcy court. Once transferred, it will be up to the New Jersey bankruptcy court whether to further extend the stay. [Reuters; Nov. 10, 2021]
Bloomberg reports on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision not to revisit its 1992 Dewsnup v. Timm decision, which held that homeowners cannot reduce a partially underwater mortgage through the Bankruptcy Code. The petitioners, a couple from North Carolina, argued that their secured lender’s claim should be reduced from the approximately $240,000 left on their mortgage to the approximately $220,000 that their home was worth arguing that that Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “allowed secured claim” can only be equal to the value of the collateral. The Supreme Court, however, decided not to revisit the decisions of the lower courts who agreed with the petitioner’s secured lender. [Bloomberg; Nov. 8, 2021]
