Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
IN RE JOHNSON & JOHNSON DERIVATIVE LITIGATION
Case Number:
3:10-cv-02033
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Derivative Litigation
Judge:
Firms
- Carella Byrne
- Cohn Lifland
- Foley Hoag
- Kantrowitz Goldhamer
- Lite DePalma
- Miller Shah
- Riker Danzig
- Robinson Miller
- Samuel & Stein
- Schnader Harrison
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
October 03, 2011
Shareholder Suit Over J&J Recall, Kickback Woes Tossed
A New Jersey federal judge on Thursday dismissed a derivative shareholder suit against health giant Johnson & Johnson, ruling the complaint lacked facts to show that J&J executives ignored warning signs about drug recalls, kickback schemes and other damaging incidents.
-
July 21, 2011
J&J Says Board Not To Blame For Recalls, Corruption Claims
Johnson & Johnson responded Monday to a slew of shareholder derivative actions in New Jersey federal court with a report stating the company's board of directors did not breach its duties and ignore warning signs of product recalls and illegal kickbacks and bribes.