Johnson & Johnson baby powder. Photo: MailHamdi/Shutterstock.comCalifornia Jury Hands Johnson & Johnson a Defense Verdict in Talc Trial
A Los Angeles jury gave Johnson & Johnson a defense verdict Wednesday in the latest mesothelioma trial over its baby powder.
October 09, 2019 at 09:02 PM
3 minute read
A Los Angeles jury gave Johnson & Johnson a defense verdict in the latest mesothelioma trial over its baby powder.
The verdict, announced Wednesday, comes one year after the first trial in the same case ended in a mistrial. This time, the jury in Los Angeles Superior Court found that Johnson & Johnson was not liable for Carolyn Weirick's mesothelioma, a type of lung cancer she was diagnosed with in 2017.
"The jury got it right—Johnson's baby powder does not contain asbestos and was not the cause of the plaintiff's disease," wrote Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman Jennifer Taylor in an email. "This is the seventh jury that has found in favor of Johnson & Johnson, and importantly, all of the verdicts against the company that have been through the appeals process have been overturned. Today's decision, and this trial track record, are consistent with the decades of clinical evidence and scientific studies by medical experts around the world that support the safety of Johnson's baby powder."
The verdict follows Tuesday's mistrial in the first talcum powder trial in Georgia over Johnson & Johnson's baby powder, prompted by a deadlocked jury. That case was among thousands of lawsuits alleging Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products caused ovarian cancer. In cases alleging mesothelioma claims, juries have come out with a mixed bag of defense verdicts and mistrials, along with awards of up to $117 million.
Weirick's attorney, Jay Stuemke, shareholder at Simon Greenstone & Panatier in Dallas, did not respond to a request for comment.
In other mesothelioma cases in Los Angeles Superior Court, the Simon Greenstone firm got a $40 million verdict last month and a $25.75 million verdict last year. The firm also won a $37.3 million verdict last month in New Jersey's Middlesex County Superior Court.
In Weirick's first trial, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Margaret Oldendorf spent five days attempting to get the jury to reach a verdict. She interviewed jurors, reiterated jury instructions, ordered more oral arguments and replaced a juror with an alternate.
But, the jury was deadlocked.
The retrial was before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Cary Nishimoto. Johnson & Johnson was represented by John Ewald, a New York partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.
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 All
'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute read
‘It's Your Funeral’: On Avoiding Damaging Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
Practice Tips From—and About—the New Judges on the Northern District of California Bench
Trending Stories
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
