I don't get how a legal entity can somehow magically hand its liability to a ficticious subsidiary. If the suit is against JJ, how could it be pointed somewhere else? Like what is the legal standing for that...?
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2024
76 points (98.7% liked)
News
23794 readers
4627 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The legal standing is that a brazenly corrupt Supreme Court has been purchased by billionaires, and any sort of regulatory agency that might counter that sort of thing has been defanged or defunded.
What a complete load of bullcrap.
J&J's "Two-Step" strategy has already been knocked down twice by Federal Courts and unless J&J appeals the cases will never reach SCOTUS and they won't do that because they know they will lose. There's also no "regulatory agency" in charge of the cases that Federal Courts can or must hear nor should one exist.
I agree J&J's "court shopping" like this is unethical but its up to Congress to make it illegal. Congress, not the Judiciary, is to blame for continuing to allow this legal chicanery
You're kind of both right. Different sides of the same corruption coin. Both agencies should be willing to curb this practice but both are corrupted.
If the suit is against JJ, how could it be pointed somewhere else?
The parent company sells or transfers all of the assets related to the lawsuit to a separate company and along with those assets goes all the liabilities...like lawsuits.
Yeah, it's just like when you kill someone in an automobile accident. So long as you sell the car involved, you can pass the liability to the buyer
If Asbestos is in the talc, it cannot be removed. Don't use products with talc, regardless of how "safe" a company claims it is. You can do tests that won't detect Asbestos in talc. But a proper test will show if there is Asbestos in the talc. No one needs to use talc anymore in toiletries or food. There are safe alternatives, this is 2024, science has progressed. J&J just wants to avoid losing money and talc is just a cheap product. I boycotted J&J years before this latest issue arose with the talc. There are less evil corporations to buy from.
Shit. The barber put this shit on me at every haircut as a child. I had no idea.
They were doing their job asbestos they can
I am pretty sure this is what took my Aunt. She would bath herself in it every day since I could remember. Died of cancer a few years back but because of other choices the link would never be made.