In the aftermath of a lengthy, costly and high-profile talc litigation battle, many women across the country have decided their best path forward is a generous and equitable settlement proposal, which they voted for in overwhelming numbers. As bankruptcy court proceedings continue into January with an expected decision on the matter, claimants remain eager for approval of this plan that offers their best opportunity for a fair, secure and timely path to recovery.
Even despite this strong support for the plan, opponents have come forward to question the decision made by most of the claimants, challenging the integrity of the process and those backing it. Truth be told, most claimants and their attorneys have already decided that the proposed settlement is the best way to close the books on this lengthy litigation, with 83 percent of the 93,500 claimants voting in favor. Little else is needed to conclude that a substantial majority realizes this resolution offers the best chance at closure and justice.
By voting for the plan, claimants were given the opportunity to weigh the potential benefits of a swift resolution against the possibility of further delays, recognizing that years of litigation could result in little to no recovery. If these talc cases do go to trial, it could take decades to prosecute them all, denying thousands of claimants, especially seniors, a chance to reach closure in their lifetimes. This settlement plan guarantees claimants $9 billion in compensation over the course of 25 years, which provides security and predictability in a tort system that often provides neither.
The Texas settlement plan’s structure not only ensures fair treatment and compensation to plaintiffs but also would put an end to debates over the validity of scientific evidence related to talc claims. This issue in our legal system — the growing nature of “junk science” — is the primary reason the talc litigation has been stalled for years. Court cases are ultimately decided on a specific set of facts, and junk science introduces into court scientific claims of a dubious nature largely intended to muddy the waters. The danger is the possible outcome of unsubstantiated verdicts.
Attorneys and juries are not scientists, so junk science inevitably overwhelms the courts, using up valuable time and resources to cut through the weeds. With junk science contributing to America’s flawed and imbalanced legal system, the consequences come down to scarce resources that have severe implications for communities. In fact, mass torts across the country contribute to an annual “tort tax” of $3,965 per family. As of 2023, this excessive litigation not only increases the costs of nearly everything consumers purchase but also affects 4.8 million jobs.
As junk science claims continue to grow, the Texas settlement plan aims to reduce these claims from being considered in court. Even today, many questions still remain around the research linking talc exposure to ovarian cancer, all because our legal system has allowed these flawed claims to confound our judges. This is another reason the settlement plan is the best path forward, as it puts these baseless claims to bed and will ensure that claimants with legitimate damages receive their fair rewards. Without this plan, claimants would continue down an undesirable tort path, likely never achieving resolution or closure.
Opponents of this plan — presumably plaintiffs’ lawyers focused on lining their own pockets with the settlement money — will continue to seek gaps in this settlement plan. These claimants had the choice to vote “no” against the plan, and an overwhelming majority voted in favor of it instead. Their decision ought to be honored and granted.
