Johnson & Johnson's baby powder. (Photo: Mike Mozart/Flickr)Johnson & Johnson Gets Second Talc Defense Win in a Week
"This is the fourth consecutive verdict in favor of Johnson & Johnson in these cases and the eighth defense verdict this year," said a Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman.
December 21, 2019 at 12:11 PM
2 minute read
A St. Louis jury has rejected claims that Johnson & Johnson's baby powder caused a woman's ovarian cancer, the second defense win for the company in the past week.
Friday's verdict involved claims from plaintiff Vickie Forrest, who was one of 13 women whose case was halted by the Missouri Supreme Court earlier this year. Allison Brown of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom and Michael Brown of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough defended Johnson & Johnson.
"This is the fourth consecutive verdict in favor of Johnson & Johnson in these cases and the eighth defense verdict this year," said Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman Kimberly Montagnino. "The jury carefully considered the decades of independent clinical evidence, which show Johnson's baby powder is safe, does not contain asbestos, and does not cause cancer. We know that anyone suffering from cancer is searching for answers, which is why the science and facts on this topic are so important."
Ted Meadows and David Dearing of Beasley Allen; Allen Smith of The Smith Law Firm; and Michelle Parfitt of Ashcraft & Gerel represented Forrest in the St. Louis Circuit Court trial.
"It's disappointing that J&J will view this verdict as approval of the continued sale of talc-based body powder that harms women," Meadows said in a statement.
Johnson & Johnson earlier in the week received a defense verdict in Los Angeles Superior Court, beating back claims its talcum powder caused the plaintiff to get mesothelioma in 2016. Joseph Satterley of Kazan, McClain, Satterley & Greenwood represented the plaintiff.
Johnson & Johnson's attorneys at Kirkland & Ellis accused the plaintiff's lawyers of misconduct in that case. The judge refused to grant Johnson & Johnson a mistrial, but Kazan McClain brought in Keker, Van Nest & Peters to respond to the misconduct claims.
Johnson & Johnson, which has also lost several verdicts, including one last year awarding $4.7 billion to 22 women, has criticized state court trials for allowing "junk science" into the courtroom. Several of the verdicts were overturned on appeal.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Plaintiffs Seek Redo of First Trial Over Medical Device Plant's Emissions
4 minute read
Working Across the 'Entire Ecosystem' Propels Ropes & Gray's Life Sciences Practice
Baker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
