Mass Tort Liability: The Use of Chapter 11 Both Pre- and Post- Purdue Pharma
August 25, 2025
Publication| Bankruptcy & Corporate Restructuring
Dating back to In re Johns-Manville Corp., et al., Case No. 82-11656 (CGM) (Johns-Manville), the bankruptcy process has provided companies with useful tools for addressing current and future mass tort liability in a centralized forum. Indeed, Chapter 11 has been used as a means for addressing mass tort liabilities related to, among other things, asbestos exposure, opioid addiction, airbag malfunctions, sexual abuse, talc exposure and defective medical devices.
The Delaware Bankruptcy Court, being one of the most sophisticated and experienced venues for handling Chapter 11 cases, has played a significant role in the mass tort bankruptcy space. A small sampling of the mass tort cases that have been handled by the Delaware Bankruptcy Court includes Mallinckrodt (opioids), Boy Scouts of America (abuse claims), TK Holdings (defective airbags), Blitz U.S.A. (defective gas cans), Paddock Enterprises (asbestos), Imerys Talc America (talc/asbestos), Federal Mogul Global (asbestos) and the USG Company (asbestos).
This article is intended to provide a high-level overview of the use of Chapter 11 as a means of addressing a company’s mass tort liability, as well as a discussion of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, 603 U.S. 204 (2024) (Purdue Pharma), and the effect that it may have on the mass tort bankruptcy practice moving forward.