Patrick J. Vinett

A New Jersey federal judge has revived a bankrupt Johnson & Johnson talc subsidiary's trade libel claim over a 2020 scientific article linking asbestos in talc to mesothelioma, finding that new evidence and allegations concerning the authenticity of the author's data are enough to survive a motion to dismiss. U.S. District Judge Georgette Castner on Friday granted Pecos River Talc LLC's motion for relief from judgment and leave to amend its complaint against Dr. Jacqueline Moline, concluding that the company — successor to Johnson & Johnson's talc liabilities — had presented significant new allegations that were unavailable when the court first dismissed the suit. Central to the ruling was the disclosure of a "key" identifying all 33 individuals whose medical histories formed the basis of Moline's 2020 article in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, which asserted that each patient had "no known asbestos exposure other than cosmetic talcum powder." "The extensiveness of the fraudulent nature of the article demonstrates that Dr. Moline fabricated the data presented in her article," Judge Castner wrote of Pecos River's new evidence, quoting directly from the proposed amended complaint. That allegation, the court said, if proven, would fall outside the First Amendment protections that shield scientific debate and peer‑reviewed conclusions. Pecos River argued that the newly revealed identities showed that numerous individuals in the study had documented asbestos exposures unrelated to cosmetic talc and that Moline allegedly knew about the exposures from her work as a plaintiffs' expert in their underlying tort cases. The company contended that the new information fundamentally alters the nature of its claim, shifting it from a dispute over scientific interpretation to an allegation of data fabrication. The decision marks a dramatic reversal in a case that was dismissed in 2024 and signals that the litigation over the scientific underpinnings of talc‑related cancer claims is far from over. Moline's 2020 article has been widely cited in talc‑mesothelioma litigation across the country. The study described 33 individuals who allegedly developed mesothelioma despite having "no known asbestos exposure other than cosmetic talcum powder," and concluded that exposure to asbestos‑contaminated talcum powders "can cause mesothelioma." The article has been described as groundbreaking, with widespread influence on litigation involving Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder and Shower‑to‑Shower products. Pecos River alleges that the article's central premise was false and that Dr. Moline knew it was false when she published it. The company claims that Dr. Moline's role as a paid expert in more than 200 cosmetic‑talc cases gave her access to deposition transcripts, medical records and other materials showing that many of the individuals had alternative asbestos exposures, information she allegedly omitted from the study. When the court dismissed the case in 2024, it held that Dr. Moline's statements were nonactionable scientific opinions. Applying the Third Circuit's framework for distinguishing fact from scientific inference, the court concluded that the article's statements were "tentative and subject to revision," and that disputes over the completeness of the data were matters for peer review, not litigation. But the new evidence, Judge Castner wrote, changed the analysis. The turning point came in April 2025, when a New York appellate court authorized the deanonymization of the 33 individuals in the study. The resulting "key" confirmed that four individuals previously suspected by Pecos River — Helen Kohr, Stephen Lanzo, Doris Jackson and Valerie Jo Dalis — were indeed among the study subjects. More important, Pecos River alleged that the key revealed at least seven additional individuals who had known asbestos exposures unrelated to cosmetic talc. One example is Carol Schoeniger, who testified that her husband sanded and applied asbestos‑containing joint compound in their home in the 1960s. Pecos River pointed out that in Schoeniger's underlying litigation, Moline herself identified this as a potential exposure. Yet the 2020 article listed Schoeniger as having no known exposure apart from talc. Similar discrepancies appeared across multiple individuals, Pecos River claims, arguing that collectively they suggested not mere scientific disagreement but intentional misrepresentation. Judge Castner emphasized that the new allegations go beyond the court's earlier concerns about omitted variables or interpretive differences. If Pecos River can prove that Moline knowingly misrepresented the subjects' exposure histories, the statements in the article could be treated as verifiably false factual assertions rather than protected scientific conclusions. The court also noted the relevance of a 2025 decision from the Eastern District of Virginia, LLT Mgmt. LLC v. Emory, which involved a different article related to Moline's asbestos work. That case addressed similar allegations of data manipulation and provided a framework for treating certain scientific representations as potentially factual and actionable. While not binding, the Virginia decision reinforced the idea that allegations of fabrication fell outside the protections afforded to scientific opinion. Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday. Pecos River Talc is represented by Peter C. Harvey and Thomas P. Kurland of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, and Matthew L. Bush of Kirkland & Ellis LLP. Moline is represented by Kevin H. Marino and John D. Tortorella of Marino Tortorella & Boyle PC. The case is Pecos River Talc LLC f/k/a LTL Management LLC v. Moline, case number 3:23-cv-02990, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

Mar 2

4 min

Kirkland & Ellis advised private equity funds sponsored by Tract Capital, an alternative asset manager focused on creating businesses that support digital infrastructure growth, data centers and generative AI, on the lease and purchase and sale of real property for a 230-megawatt utility capacity (200-megawatt critical IT capacity), turnkey data center and electrical substation to be built in Storey County, Nevada. The project has been 100% leased to a AA- investment grade rated tenant pursuant to a 197-month “triple net” lease. Read Tract Capital’s press release The Kirkland team advising on the lease included real estate lawyers Kim McGrath and David Arbus; investment funds lawyers Jordan Murray and Joseph Baldwin; and tax lawyer Mark Schwed. The Kirkland team advising on the purchase and sale included corporate lawyers Melissa Kalka and Emily Lichtenheld; real estate lawyer Andy Small; investment funds lawyers Jordan Murray and Joseph Baldwin; and tax lawyer Mark Schwed.

Mar 2

1 min

Kirkland & Ells advised Ziff Davis, Inc. (Nasdaq: ZD) on a definitive agreement to sell its Connectivity division to Accenture (NYSE: ACN) for $1.2 billion in cash. Ziff Davis’ Connectivity brands are globally recognized in fixed broadband, mobile and Wi-Fi network design, intelligence, insights, testing and incident detection. These brands, including Ookla, Speedtest, Ekahau, Downdetector and RootMetrics, empower organizations to optimize networks, elevate digital experiences and ensure faster, more reliable connectivity. The transaction is currently expected to close in the coming months, subject to the satisfaction of certain closing conditions and receipt of required regulatory approvals. Read the transaction press release The Kirkland team included corporate lawyers David Klein, Andrew Norwich and Daniel Wolf; tax lawyer Sara Zablotney; executive compensation lawyer Rob Fowler; capital markets lawyers Sophia Hudson and Zoey Hitzert; antitrust & competition lawyer Daniel Zach; and technology & IP transactions lawyer Daisy Darvall.

Mar 3

1 min

Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Co. and multiple Florida homeowners associations have ended their dispute in Florida federal court over the associations' more than $230 million insurance claim for Pensacola Beach condominiums damaged by Hurricane Sally. According to their joint dismissal stipulation filed Monday, Westchester Surplus and the homeowners associations have agreed to permanently dismiss their claims against each other. The insurer and the homeowners associations initially told the court in February that they decided to settle their dispute and planned to file a joint dismissal stipulation. Westchester Surplus and 15 other insurers began their suit against the homeowners associations in January 2023. According to their amended suit, an appraiser picked by the defendants filed "an egregiously overinflated" hurricane damages claim for more than $230 million. The insurers alleged that the defendants asked for an appraisal after Hurricane Sally hit and filed a more than $6.4 million sworn proof of loss claim. But, according to the insurers, this claim eventually "ballooned to an amount wholly detached from any actual damage resulting from the hurricane." "In particular, the defendants' selected appraiser submitted estimates to the appraisal panel that include charges that are wholly improper, overstated, unrelated, duplicative, and attempt to turn the defendants' legitimate loss into a once-in-a-lifetime windfall at plaintiffs' expense," the insurers alleged. "Defendants' appraiser increased the value of the claim from the unsolicited sworn proof of loss by over $225 million when he submitted an outrageous $233,030,601.80 claim to the appraisal panel, which raises significant questions concerning the appraiser's interest and honesty, as well as the fraudulent nature of the claim and its supporting documentation," they further alleged. In September 2023, the defendants filed counterclaims against the insurers, alleging that the insurers breached their insurance policies by wrongfully refusing to pay for the appraised hurricane damage. However, in September 2025, the presiding court nixed the defendants' $187 million appraisal award, ruling that the defendants' appraiser failed to properly state how much the condominiums were damaged by Hurricane Sally. Counsel for Westchester Surplus and the defendants didn't respond to requests for comment Tuesday. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Co. and multiple other insurers are represented by Alexandra J. Schultz, Juan P. Garrido and John D. Dickenson of Cozen O'Connor. The Portofino defendants are represented by Edward P. Fleming, Matthew A. Bush and Aaron T. McCurdy of McDonald Fleming LLP, Kurtis J. Keefer of Goede DeBoest & Cross PLLC and Charles F. Beall Jr. of Moore Hill & Westmoreland PA. The case is Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Co. et al. v. Portofino Masters Homeowners Association Inc. et al., case number 3:23-cv-00453, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

Mar 3

2 min

Kirkland & Ellis advised Quantum Health, the leading creator of healthcare navigation, on the acquisition of CirrusMD, a premier on-demand virtual care company. The acquisition brings together navigation and physician-led virtual care to drive more immediate care integration and stronger outcomes for members across their healthcare journey. This acquisition builds on Quantum Health’s momentum expanding clinically-validated provider steerage through Embold Health and launching its expanded solution suite built on a new agentic AI platform, further strengthening the company’s ability to act earlier, guide members more effectively and deliver measurable savings. Quantum Health is a portfolio company of Warburg Pincus and Great Hill Partners. Read the transaction press release The Kirkland team included corporate lawyers Keri Schick Norton and Alice Billmire; technology & IP transactions lawyer Daisy Darvall; healthcare transactions lawyer Robert Kantrowitz; and tax lawyers David Grenker and Vivek Ratnam.

Mar 3

1 min