J&J Hit With $25.75M Verdict Over Baby Powder's Link to Mesothelioma
A California jury has awarded $25.75 million to a woman diagnosed with mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure from using Johnson & Johnson's baby powder thousands of times.
May 24, 2018 at 04:48 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com
A California jury has awarded $25.75 million to a woman diagnosed with mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure from using Johnson & Johnson's baby powder thousands of times.
The verdict, announced on Thursday, follows a $117 million award that a New Jersey jury came out with last month against Johnson & Johnson and Imerys Talc America Inc., a talc supplier, over similar claims. It's the third verdict among cases that allege Johnson & Johnson's cosmetic talcum powder products caused mesothelioma. A fourth trial, involving a lawyer in South Carolina who died, began on May 14.
“Our clients are hopeful that this verdict can further bring light to this unbelievable example of corporate misconduct,” plaintiffs attorney David Greenstone, a shareholder at Dallas-based Simon Greenstone Panatier, wrote in a statement. “Johnson's baby powder has contained asbestos for decades. People need to know about this.”
Spokeswoman Carol Goodrich said Johnson & Johnson would appeal the verdict.
“We will continue to defend the safety of our product because it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma,” she wrote in an email. “Over the past 50 years, multiple independent, non-litigation-driven scientific evaluations have been conducted by respected academic institutions and government bodies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and none have found that the talc in Johnson's baby powder contains asbestos.”
Unlike thousands of lawsuits brought by women alleging Johnson & Johnson's baby powder caused ovarian cancer, the mesothelioma cases focus on whether its cosmetic talc products contained asbestos, a known carcinogen. Juries in mesothelioma cases against other talc companies, like Colgate-Palmolive Co. and Whittaker Clark & Daniels, have come out with verdicts for plaintiffs.
In the first trial over mesothelioma claims against Johnson & Johnson, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury handed the New Jersey-based pharmaceutical firm and Imerys a defense verdict on Nov. 16.
David Greenstone, partner in Dallas' Simon Greenstone Panatier.
Many of the same law firms in the first trial were up against each other in the recent case, brought by Joanne Anderson, 66. She used Johnson & Johnson's baby powder on her children and used it on herself as a bowler. Greenstone, along with firm shareholder Chris Panatier, who handled the first trial, and Conor Nideffer, an associate in the firm's Long Beach, California, office, represented Anderson. Mel Bailey of Dallas-based Bailey Crowe Arnold & Majors and King & Spalding's Alexander Calfo, a partner in Los Angeles who also was involved in the first trial, represented Johnson & Johnson.
Trial began on May 2. The Los Angeles Superior Court jury found Johnson & Johnson failed to warn and was negligent and liable for two-thirds of the compensatory damages and all the punitive damages. The award was $21.75 million in compensatory damages and $4 million in punitive damages. In addition to talcum powder products, Anderson claimed asbestos exposure from her husband's car maintenance and repair work at their home may have caused her diagnosis. Originally, nine other defendants were in the case, including Imerys, but Johnson & Johnson was the sole defendant at trial.
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 AllMeet the Judges: Senate Confirms 7 Superior Court Nominees in Final 2024 Session
3 minute readTrending 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