Johnson & Johnson goes on trial Monday in Middlesex County, New Jersey Superior Court in a suit claiming inhaled asbestos from its talc products caused a man to develop mesothelioma.

The upcoming trial, in a suit filed by plaintiff Stephen Lanzo III of Verona is the second in which asbestos from Johnson & Johnson's talc products is alleged to have caused a user to develop mesothelioma. The first trial in the nation to link J&J products to mesothelioma, the case of Tina Herford, ended in a defense verdict in November 2017 in Los Angeles Superior Court.

The Middlesex County Courthouse, site of next week's trial, is only a few blocks from Johnson & Johnson's world headquarters in New Brunswick. Superior Court Judge Ana Viscomi is set to preside at the trial, which is expected to run for two months.

But while Johnson & Johnson can still claim the upper hand in litigation linking its talc products to mesothelioma, its track record is less successful in suits by women who claim they developed ovarian cancer after using J&J talc products for feminine hygiene.

In 2016, plaintiffs obtained three verdicts against the company—$55 million, $70 million and $72 million—in suits linking talc to ovarian cancer. In 2017, J&J saw one defense verdict in talc litigation, and two verdicts for plaintiffs—$110 million and $417 million. Two of the ovarian cancer verdicts, for $72 million and $417 million, have been reversed.

The trial had been slated to begin Jan. 22 but Viscomi told jurors to come back in a week while the parties deal with a last-minute evidentiary dispute. Lanzo claims his only probable exposure to asbestos is from Johnson's Baby Powder, but J&J says it has a tissue sample from the plaintiff showing the presence of a type of asbestos associated with other commercial products. However, Viscomi would not let the drug company admit the evidence  because it was not served on a timely basis.

On Monday, J&J moved to stay the trial pending an interlocutory appeal, but Viscomi denied the request. But she later agreed to put the trial off for a week while the parties address the evidentiary dispute. Lawyers for both sides then continued their discussion of the dispute in the judge's chambers.

Lanzo's suit claims J&J knew that its products contained asbestos but failed to warn consumers. The company, for its part, maintains that its products never contained asbestos, and maintain that the plaintiffs have used faulty test methods.

Lanzo is represented by Moshe Maimon of Levy Konigsberg in New York. Johnson & Johnson is represented by Drinker Biddle & Reath and Kirkland & Ellis.

In addition to Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Cos., the defendants in the case include Imerys Talc America and Cyprus Amax Minerals Co.

In Herford's case in Los Angeles, J&J scored a victory after arguing that asbestos exposure from other sources—such as therapeutic radiation treatments and clothing worn by her father, who was exposed to asbestos at his job—may have caused Herford's mesothelioma.

But the lead plaintiff's counsel in Herford's case, Chris Panatier of Dallas-based Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett, said the defense verdict would have little effect on future trials.

“The talc/asbestos case is extremely complicated, dealing with all manner of microscopic techniques and mineralogy etc.,” he said. “It's our job to make all of that accessible and though I tried to do that, perhaps it wasn't enough. Also, from my conversations with a few of the jurors, it sounded like this simply was not a jury that was going to find for a plaintiff. I accept that. It happens.”