Processing your request


please wait...

 | Case Page

 | Case Page |

Case Page

 

Johnson & Johnson

Case Summary

Johnson & Johnson Securities Litigation

Case Summary

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 05/03/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: February 08, 2018

According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period Defendants made false or misleading statements, and failed to disclose that J&J has known for decades that its talc products include asbestos fibers and that the exposure to those fibers can cause ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. J&J’s denials that talc could cause cancer and mesothelioma were materially false and misleading, and the company concealed contingent liabilities and loss of future revenues from the product. As a result of the company’s actions, the lawsuit claims, investors suffered damages when the true details entered the market.

On November 26, 2018, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on February 28, 2019.

Company & Securities Information

Defendant: Johnson & Johnson

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Major Drugs
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: JNJ
Company Market: New York SE
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.

First Identified Complaint

Frank Hall, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, et al.

COURT: D. New Jersey
DOCKET #: 18-CV-01833
JUDGE: Hon. Freda L. Wolfson
DATE FILED: 02/08/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/22/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/07/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Ben Crump Law PLLC
  2. The Rosen Law Firm (South Orange)
First Identified Complaint (FIC) Filings:
No Document Title Filing Date
1 Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws 02/08/2018
2 U.S. District Court Civil Docket 11/26/2018
3 Order 11/26/2018

Reference Complaint

San Diego County Employees Retirement Association, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, et al.

COURT: D. New Jersey
DOCKET #: 18-CV-01833
JUDGE: Hon. Freda L. Wolfson
DATE FILED: 02/28/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/22/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/13/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, P.C.
    5 Becker Farm Road , Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, P.C., NJ 07068
    (973) 994-1700 (973) 994-1744 ·
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
Reference Complaint (REF) Filings:
No Document Title Filing Date
1 First Amended Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws 02/28/2019
2 U.S. District Court Civil Docket 02/28/2019

Related District Court Filings

—Related District Court Filings Data is not available
 
 

Cases