Court Approves $535 Million Bankruptcy Settlement Linked to Berkshire
Key Facts
A bankruptcy court in New Jersey approved a $535 million settlement covering asbestos injury liabilities tied to a defunct subsidiary, The Wall Street Journal reported in October 2026. Judge Michael Kaplan rejected conflict-of-interest claims against the settlement negotiators. He also denied a request by the Talc Claims Committee and the future claims representative for standing to pursue liability and other claims against Brenntag and its subsidiaries. The ruling puts court approval of the settlement at the center of the case, alongside a decision on a separate procedural request to pursue other parties. The settlement concerns claims against companies linked to Berkshire Hathaway, chemical distributor Brenntag and rail services company Deutsche Bahn.
The judge said the settlement represented “by far the most reliable path to ensure fair, reasonable and timely compensation for all creditors.” The Wall Street Journal reported that the court concluded the settlement was in the best interests of the estates and viewed it as the most reliable path to recover compensation for creditors. That rationale reflects the court’s balancing of the possibility of pursuing additional claims against Brenntag and its subsidiaries with the proposed settlement. But denying the request for standing does not mean the court dismissed all challenges or disputes related to the case. Nor does the court’s approval concern anything beyond this specific settlement, and it does not by itself establish that all talc claims have been resolved or that Berkshire’s broader liabilities have been eliminated.
The settlement stems from an agreement reached in September 2026 between Whittaker, Clark & Daniels and the non-debtor entities, which the court approved in October, according to Bloomberg Law. Whittaker was a talc supplier that ceased operations, while the settlement seeks to resolve claims against companies linked to Berkshire, Brenntag and Deutsche Bahn. The Wall Street Journal tied the liabilities addressed by the deal to asbestos injuries and a defunct subsidiary. The judge rejected conflict-of-interest claims against the settlement negotiators while considering the agreement. The sequence distinguishes two separate stages: the deal was reached in September, followed by approval in October.
On the background to the relationship with Berkshire, the company said in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that an indirect subsidiary acquired shares in Whittaker and other companies on December 14, 2007. It added that those companies had ceased operations in 2004. The acquisition therefore came after the relevant companies had halted operations, while liabilities related to asbestos, talc and environmental claims remained, according to the filing. Berkshire said none of its companies participated in the manufacturing and chemical operations that led to the liabilities. This context provides the basis for the company’s position on its connection to the case, while the settlement addresses claims linked to the entities involved.
Berkshire also said the companies filed voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in New Jersey on April 26, 2023. According to the company, its businesses were not involved in the manufacturing and chemical operations that gave rise to the liabilities. The current ruling follows those filings and comes in the context of a settlement between Whittaker and the non-debtor entities reached in September 2026. The court then approved the agreement in October and rejected the Claims Committee’s and future claims representative’s request to pursue Brenntag and its subsidiaries. The ruling’s details are limited to this approval, the request for standing and the conflict-of-interest claims concerning the negotiators.