I don't know what you're trying to explain. You cited J&J in your original post as a company who got away with it, they didn't, you were mistaken. They're tryin

I don't know what you're trying to explain. You cited J&J in your original post as a company who got away with it, they didn't, you were mistaken. They're trying but are not successful. The situation, as of today, is that J&J (through their subsidiary), will be able to be sued an held liable for any negative health effects from their products. > Let's not act like J&J is trying to be in any way 'fair' about making sure claimants are taken care of. Nobody is. The legal system, however, is currently doing it's part to keep them fair. > When the judge initially dismissed their bankruptcy filing, they updated the number and refiled within hours. That's taking the piss. Who cares, they can file whatever they want. The bankruptcy was dismissed because the company they created was not in danger of insolvency at all because they're wholly owned and funded by J&J who is not insolvent. That's what _should_ have happened in the GP case and what _is_ happening in the J&J case. Your cynicism is completely unwarranted yet you seem very inclined to keep it up.