California Jury Awards $12M in Talcum Powder Case Against J&J, Colgate-Palmolive
Both Johnson & Johnson and Colgate-Palmolive said they planned to appeal, citing numerous procedural and evidentiary errors.
June 12, 2019 at 03:34 PM
3 minute read
A California jury has awarded $12 million to a woman diagnosed in 2018 with mesothelioma after using talc-based cosmetic products made by Johnson & Johnson and Colgate-Palmolive Co.
The Alameda County Superior Court jury found that both Colgate-Palmolive and Johnson & Johnson failed to warn about known risks associated with their talcum powder products, which were substantial factors in plaintiff Patricia Schmitz's mesothelioma, according to Courtroom View Network's coverage of the trial.
Schmitz claimed in a lawsuit that she got mesothelioma, a deadly lung cancer tied to asbestos, after using Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products and Colgate-Palmolive's Cashmere Bouquet throughout her life. The trial began April 22.
“We will pursue an appeal because Johnson's baby powder does not contain asbestos or cause cancer, as supported by decades of independent clinical evidence,” wrote Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman Kimberly Montagnino. “There were serious procedural and evidentiary errors in the proceeding that required us to move for mistrial on multiple occasions and we believe provide strong grounds for appeal.”
Johnson & Johnson filed a motion for mistrial after the trial began, based on the judge's rulings, and Colgate-Palmolive filed a motion for nonsuit.
“This trial suffered from numerous significant legal and evidentiary errors that we believe unfairly prejudiced the defense,” wrote Colgate-Palmolive spokesman Tom DiPiazza. “Indeed, in cases where the law has been applied properly and all the evidence has been presented, courts and juries around the country, including in California, have found in favor of Colgate, concluding that Colgate's Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder product, which Colgate has not sold in the United States since 1995, did not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma.”
The verdict award was for compensatory damages. Jurors found that Johnson & Johnson and Colgate-Palmolive each were 40% at fault, with the remaining 20% against Avon, which was not a defendant at trial. The jury, which deliberated for four days and raised several questions about the verdict form, ended up at an impasse on whether Johnson & Johnson and Colgate-Palmolive acted with malice, warranting punitive damages.
In March, another jury in Alameda County Superior Court hit Johnson & Johnson with a $29 million talc verdict involving Teresa Leavitt, diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2017 after using its baby powder, and her husband Dean McElroy.
The same plaintiffs lawyers, Joe Satterley and Steven Kazan, of Kazan, McClain, Satterley & Greenwood, who won that verdict, in 2018 secured a $117 million verdict in New Jersey along with firm colleague Denyse Clancy and Moshe Maimon of Levy Konigsberg in New York.
Satterley did not respond to a request for comment.
This time, his team was up against Alexander Calfo, a partner at King & Spalding in Los Angeles, and Michael Battle of Barnes & Thornburg in Washington, D.C., for Johnson & Johnson. Foley & Mansfield partners Gary Sharp in Walnut Creek, California; Peter Mularczyk, in Los Angeles; and Andrew Sharp, in Detroit, represented Colgate-Palmolive.
The trial was contentious on both sides. Plaintiffs attorneys sought $1,000 in contempt sanctions against Calfo for violating a pretrial order that banned him from attacking Schmitz's lawyers.
“Mr. Calfo not only accused plaintiff's lawyers of manufacturing a claim, but put before the jury a diagram placing the plaintiff's lawyers at the center of a web of deception,” wrote Clancy in a June 5 motion. “This is an affront to the bar, an affront to the legal system, and an affront to this court.”
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 AllState Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
3 minute readApple Disputes 'Efforts to Manufacture' Imaging Sensor Claims Against iPhone 15 Technology
Lawsuit alleges racial and gender discrimination led to an Air Force contractor's death at California airfield
7 minute readTrending Stories
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.
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