Another Mistrial Declared in J&J Talcum Powder Case
Another jury in Los Angeles deadlocked on whether Johnson & Johnson's baby powder caused mesothelioma.
October 03, 2018 at 04:26 PM
3 minute read
Johnson & Johnson baby powder/Photo: Raihana Asral/Shutterstock.com
A second jury in two weeks has failed to reach a verdict in a trial alleging Johnson & Johnson's baby powder caused mesothelioma.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Stephen Maloney declared a mistrial on Tuesday, the third day of jury deliberations in a trial that began about a month ago. The mistrial comes a little over a week after another jury deadlocked in a separate trial against Johnson & Johnson involving the same Dallas-based plaintiffs firm, Simon Greenstone Panatier. In that case, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Margaret Oldendorf declared a mistrial following a week of deliberations and numerous efforts to assist the jury in reaching a verdict.
“We are grateful to the court and jury for their time and careful consideration of the facts in this case,” wrote Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman Kimberly Montagnino. “This is the second mistrial as a result of a hung jury in two weeks, which we believe reflects the careful consideration by these juries of the real science in these cases. We look forward to a new trial to present our defense—which rests on decades of independent, non-litigation driven scientific evaluations, none of which have found that Johnson's Baby Powder contains asbestos.”
Johnson & Johnson was represented by King & Spalding partner Alexander Calfo and counsel Julia Romano, both in Los Angeles, and Bruce Hurley, a partner in Houston.
Simon Greenstone shareholder Stuart Purdy in Long Beach, California, along with John Caron of Worthington & Caron in San Pedro, California, represented two plaintiffs: Kirk Von Salzen, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2017, and his wife, Janet. A Simon Greenstone spokesman did not respond to a request for comment about the case.
In the previous trial, Jay Stuemke, a shareholder at Simon Greenstone in Dallas, represented plaintiff Carolyn Weirick, and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe's Christopher Vejnoska, a partner in San Francisco, represented Johnson & Johnson.
This week's trial is the seventh alleging Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products caused mesothelioma. Two other cases—one in Los Angeles Superior Court and one in Darlington County Circuit Court in South Carolina—ended in mistrials.
The first ended with a defense verdict on Nov. 16 in Los Angeles Superior Court. Another Los Angeles Superior Court jury awarded $25.75 million this year, followed by a $117 million award in Middlesex County Superior Court in New Jersey.
Another trial is pending in Middlesex County.
The trials are separate from the nearly 5,000 cases alleging Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products caused women to get ovarian cancer. In those cases, juries in Missouri and California have come out with five verdicts ranging from $55 million to $4.7 billion, though two awards have since been tossed out.
Unlike those cases, which have focused on the alleged links between Johnson & Johnson's talc products and ovarian cancer, the mesothelioma cases target whether cosmetic talc products contained asbestos, which is known to cause mesothelioma.
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
© 2025 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
US Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute read
Private Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row
3 minute read
Three Akin Sports Lawyers Jump to Employment Firm Littler Mendelson
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Retrial Bid by Ex-U.S. Sen. Menendez Over Evidentiary Error
- 2Lawyers: Meet Your New Partner
- 3What Will It Mean in California if New Federal Anti-SLAPP Legislation Passes?
- 4Longtime AOC Director Glenn Grant to Step Down, Assignment Judge to Take Over
- 5Elon Musk’s Tesla Pay Case Stokes Chatter Between Lawyers and Clients
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
