Preview Newsletter
Internal Cosmetic Talc Litigation Media Coverage October 7, 2016
-
J&J Attacks Cosmetics Expert In Baby Powder Cancer Trial
Oct 6, 2016 | Law 360
By Brandon Lowrey
A Johnson & Johnson attorney on Thursday grilled an expert witness who had testified earlier that the company should have warned consumers decades ago about a purported link between talc powder and ovarian cancer, suggesting the witness was being paid $1,000 an hour to give biased testimony. -
Multidistrict Litigation Created For Baby Powder Cancer Lawsuits
Oct 6, 2016 | Consumer Advocacy News
By Andrew Steinberg
http://baddrug.news/news/multidistrict-litigation-created-baby-powder-cancer-lawsuits/
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
US Coverage
-
J&J Attacks Cosmetics Expert In Baby Powder Cancer Trial
Oct 6, 2016 | Law 360
By Brandon Lowrey
Law360, Los Angeles (October 6, 2016, 9:19 PM EDT) -- A Johnson & Johnson attorney on Thursday grilled an expert witness who had testified earlier that the company should have warned consumers decades ago about a purported link between talc powder and ovarian cancer, suggesting the witness was being paid $1,000 an hour to give biased testimony.
David E. Dukes of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP elicited testimony that plaintiff Deborah Giannecchini, who alleges J&J and its talc supplier are liable for her ovarian cancer, retained the expert for $500 an hour — or $1,000 when he's testifying. The expert, David C. Steinberg, runs the cosmetic and topical over-the-counter drug compliance consulting firm Steinberg & Associates and founded the Cosmetic Preservatives Council.
Steinberg testified on Wednesday that J&J should have warned consumers about the possible link between genital-area talc powder use and ovarian cancer as early as 1982. But during cross-examination on Thursday, Dukes asked Steinberg why he didn't examine three studies that offer evidence that conflicted with that conclusion, and Steinberg said he wasn't provided those studies for this case.
"Don't you think, if you were really being fair and balanced with your opinions to this jury, that you would have looked at what Johnson & Johnson was considering and you would have considered what the FDA was looking at during this period, you would have looked at what theCenters for Disease Control were doing and you would have looked at the largest studies that study women and ovarian cancer and talc?" Dukes said.
Steinberg paused for several seconds before answering.
"If I was being fair and balanced, I would have — at that time, 1982, knowing what I know in terms of regulations today, I would have questioned the FDA as to why they haven't taken action against Johnson & Johnson for not complying with regulation CFR 740.1," he said, referring to the Code of Federal Regulations' section on warning statements.
Giannecchini's lawsuit alleges that Johnson & Johnson and talc supplier Imerys Talc America Inc. are liable for her ovarian cancer because they were aware that genital talc use might increase the risk of ovarian cancer but never issued any warnings or ceded that there is a solid link.
Her Stage 4 cancer and complications from her treatment greatly reduced her life expectancy and caused doctors to remove several organs, her attorney R. Allen Smith Jr. of The Smith Law Firm told jurors. Doctors removed her spleen, ovaries and uterus, along with parts of her stomach and colon, Smith said.
During Johnson & Johnson's openings, Dukes argued that there is no solid link between talc and ovarian cancer. He said that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were among trusted medical institutions that looked for a potential link but found none.
"No one knows what causes ovarian cancer," Dukes said.
Imerys seconded J&J's contention that the mineral is not linked to cancer. Imerys' attorney Nancy Erfle of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP added that her client does not market the baby powder product but merely provides the raw materials used to make it.
Giannecchini's trial follows massive losses by J&J in two similar cases this year.
In February, a Missouri jury awarded $72 million to the estate of Jacqueline Fox, who died of ovarian cancer after using the body powder for decades. It was reportedly the first time the company had been ordered to pay damages over the link between cancer and the talc used in its products.
The Fox verdict included $10 million in compensatory damages and $62 million in punitive damages.
In another case in May, a Missouri jury slammed the company with a $55 million verdict in a suit brought by Gloria Ristesund.
But plaintiffs haven't had the same degree of success thus far in New Jersey, where a judge last month tossed two similar lawsuits on grounds that their experts didn't offer enough scientific proof that there is a link between the mineral and ovarian cancer.
For more coverage of Giannecchini's trial, visit Courtroom View Network.
Giannecchini is represented by R. Allen Smith Jr. of The Smith Law Firm.
Johnson & Johnson is represented by David E. Dukes of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP and Ted Meadows of Beasley Allen Crow Methvin Portis & Miles PC. AImerys is represented by Nancy Erfle of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP.
The case is Giannecchini v. Johnson & Johnson et al., case number 1422-CC09012-01, in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court of the State of Missouri.
--Editing by Kelly Duncan.https://www.law360.com/articles/849383/j-j-attacks-cosmetics-expert-in-baby-powder-cancer-trial
-
Multidistrict Litigation Created For Baby Powder Cancer Lawsuits
Oct 6, 2016 | Consumer Advocacy News
By Andrew Steinberg
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
US Coverage
Add recipients
Suggested