Start of Johnson & Johnson Talc Powder Trial in Manhattan Delayed Until New Year
The trial, which is before Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffe, is the 11th regarding Johnson & Johnson's allegedly asbestos-laden talcum powder, which plaintiffs say is giving them cancer.
November 28, 2018 at 06:14 PM
3 minute read
The Johnson & Johnson talcum powder trial that was set begin in a Manhattan state court this week is being held off until January because there weren't enough potential jurors available to sit for the case.
The trial, which is before Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffe, is the 11th regarding Johnson & Johnson's allegedly asbestos-laden talcum powder, which plaintiffs say is giving them cancer.
The talc trials have been conducted in state courts across the country and of which four have ended in mistrials.
Attorneys for plaintiffs taking on the consumer-goods and pharmaceuticals giant have managed to win big verdicts in some venues, including the record-breaking $4.7 billion verdict that a St. Louis jury handed up earlier this year in favor of 22 plaintiffs, which was approved by a judge and which Johnson & Johnson is appealing.
Other juries have handed up awards of $117 million and more than $25 million to plaintiffs.
But overall Johnson & Johnson has the upper hand in litigation: three juries have found for the defense, which includes one in a New Jersey trial that needed only half an hour to render a defense verdict.
In the Manhattan case, plaintiff Ann Zoas, a 78-year-old Suffolk County resident, alleges that using Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder led to her 2017 diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. According to court papers, she smoked for most of her life and says she was not exposed to asbestos by way of any of the jobs that she's held.
Zoas is represented by a team from prominent plaintiffs attorney Mark Lanier's firm, The Lanier Law Firm, a familiar opponent for Johnson & Johnson: it's the firm that won over the jury in St. Louis and the one that also won a $502 million verdict from a Texas jury in litigation against Johnson & Johnson and its unit DePuy Orthopaedics over allegedly faulty hip implants.
With regard to the half-billion-dollar verdict from the Texas jury, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit threw out the verdict and ordered a new trial in the case, citing “deceptive” conduct by Lanier himself that included failing to disclose that he gave gifts to doctors who testified as expert witnesses.
Attorneys for the Lanier firm who are working on the New York trial did not respond to requests for comment on the delay.
Johnson & Johnson has retained Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler to represent the company in Manhattan. A spokeswoman for Johnson & Johnson declined to comment on the adjournment.
The company denies that its talcum powder contains asbestos and that it is responsible for Zoas' diagnosis, court papers state. The company also notes that Zoas has previously been diagnosed with throat cancer.
Read more:
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 AllDecision of the Day: Split Circuit Panel Bars Enforcement of Ivory Law's 'Display Restriction' on Antique Group Members
Decision of the Day: Judge Precludes Ballistics Expert's Opinion on Scene for 2016 Fatal Police Shooting
Decision of the Day: Contingency Fee to Counsel Result of Successful Advocacy, Not Windfall
Trending Stories
- 1Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Offices & Dragons
- 2Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
- 3Transforming Dispute Processes in Law: The Impact of Large Language Models
- 4Daniel Habib to Serve as Next Attorney-in-Charge of NY Federal Defender Appeals Unit
- 5Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege in the Modern Age of Communications
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