Preview Newsletter
Cosmetic Talc Litigation Media Coverage November 08, 2016
-
Already facing $200M in damages, J&J seeks to move talc cases out of St. Louis
Nov 7, 2016 | Fierce Pharma
By Eric Sagonowsky
Looking to rebound from three talc case defeats in St. Louis totaling nearly $200 million in damages, Johnson & Johnson is petitioning for a change of venue. -
Johnson & Johnson seeks to move talc lawsuits out of St. Louis
Nov 7, 2016 | St. Louis Business Journal
By Angela Mueller
Johnson & Johnson plans to make its case before the Missouri Court of Appeals that cases related to lawsuits alleging the company's talcum powder caused cancer should be moved out of St. Louis courts. -
J&J Looks for a Kinder Court
Nov 7, 2016 | Fortune
By Alan Murray
Johnson & Johnson is looking for a more sympathetic judge to hear its defense against women suing for damages related to side-effects of the company’s talc. -
Johnson & Johnson wants to have lawsuits claiming its talcum powder caused women to develop ovarian cancer moved to a different court
Nov 7, 2016 | Stat
By Ed Silverman
Johnson & Johnson wants to have lawsuits claiming its talcum powder caused women to develop ovarian cancer moved to a different court, Reuters reports. -
15 Toxic Things You Don’t Know Are Poisoning Your Children
Nov 7, 2016 | Collective Evolution
By Kalee Brown
... Many baby powders are talc-based, meaning that they contain high amounts of talcum powder. -
Jury Awards $70 Million in Johnson & Johnson’s Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawsuit
Nov 7, 2016 | The National Law Review
By Jonathan Rosenfeld
A jury awarded a Californian woman more than $70 million dollars in Johnson & Johnson’s third straight legal loss over claims that its talcum powder is linked to ovarian cancer. -
Mothers and Grandmother Passed yet Talcum Powder Remains
Nov 7, 2016 | Lawyers And Settlements
By Jane Mundy
Teresa and Paula have something in common. They remember their mothers and grandmother using talcum powder up until they were diagnosed with ovarian cancer and passed away. -
J&J to challenge $195M talc verdicts in appeals court
Nov 7, 2016 | News Tonight Africa
By Kehumile Mazibuko
Insisting that its talc-based products are harmless, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) has decided to challenge jury verdicts that declared the products harmful and ordered the company to compensate victims with millions of dollars.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
US Coverage
EMEA Coverage
-
Already facing $200M in damages, J&J seeks to move talc cases out of St. Louis
Nov 7, 2016 | Fierce Pharma
By Eric Sagonowsky
Looking to rebound from three talc case defeats in St. Louis totaling nearly $200 million in damages, Johnson & Johnson is petitioning for a change of venue.
The New Jersey drugmaker will argue in appeals that Missouri isn’t right for the trials, Reutersreports, because the jury pool in the area has been tainted by millions in ad spending by its opponents. Attorneys for plaintiffs deny that charge, the news service said. J&J will also contend that a majority of women bringing the cases aren’t from St. Louis, nor is the company.
The company stands by its products’ safety and “deeply” sympathizes with those affected by ovarian cancer, J&J has said.
J&J faces about 2,500 cases making the claim that the company’s talc products caused women to get ovarian cancer, with most filed at the City of St. Louis Circuit Court, according to Reuters.
In federal trials, the drugmaker pushed to consolidate pretrial work in New Jersey, arguing that a judge there is the “most familiar with the issues.” New Jersey would be the most convenient location, J&J said, and has a comparatively light caseload.
Last month, a jury said J&J should be responsible for $67.5 million in talc-related ovarian cancer damages. Before that, J&J was found responsible in talc cases in February and May, when juries at the court awarded $72 million and $55 million in damages, respectively.
On the heels of the October decision, attorney Jere Beasley told Reuters he believes the drugmaker should be thinking about settling the cases. Beasley’s firm is representing hundreds of the talc cases and also served as co-lead counsel for the landmark $4.85 billion settlement by Merck over its Vioxx painkiller, the largest pharma settlement in U.S. history.
In the case of J&J’s talc powders, though, the products are still on store shelves, so a settlement might damage the brand's reputation and wouldn't limit any potential liability, Fordham School of Law professor Howard Erichson told the news service.
J&J did have some success in New Jersey in a state court in September, when a state judge tossed two cases there after finding “multiple deficiencies” with claims that the company’s talc products caused ovarian cancer. J&J later said “plaintiffs’ scientific experts could not adequately support their theories."
http://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/already-facing-200m-damages-j-j-seeks-to-move-talc-cases-out-st-louis
-
Johnson & Johnson seeks to move talc lawsuits out of St. Louis
Nov 7, 2016 | St. Louis Business Journal
By Angela Mueller
Johnson & Johnson plans to make its case before the Missouri Court of Appeals that cases related to lawsuits alleging the company's talcum powder caused cancer should be moved out of St. Louis courts.
A St. Louis jury last month awarded a California woman more than $70 million in her lawsuit against the company, alleging its baby powder caused her ovarian cancer. It was the third jury award in St. Louis for a case linking talcum and cancer. Previous juries awarded $55 million to a South Dakota woman and $72 million to the family of an Alabama woman who died of ovarian cancer.
Johnson & Johnson argued in a court filing in August that plaintiffs' lawyers have tainted the St. Louis jury pool and that the plaintiffs have spent nearly $10 million in TV ads in the prior year, with a disproportionate share running in St. Louis, Reuters reports. The women's lawyers have denied the claims.
New Jersey-based Johnson & Johnson also argues that because most of the plaintiffs are not Missouri residents and the company does not have strong ties to the region that the cases should not have been heard in St. Louis, Reuters reports. Both arguments were rejected by the judge.
Johnson & Johnson lawyer John Beisner told Reuters the company plans to present the same arguments to the Missouri Court of Appeals. The cases would have to be refiled elsewhere if the court does not find the St. Louis court to have jurisdiction.
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2016/11/07/johnson-johnson-seeks-to-move-talc-lawsuits-out-of.html
-
Nov 7, 2016 | Fortune
By Alan Murray
Johnson & Johnson is looking for a more sympathetic judge to hear its defense against women suing for damages related to side-effects of the company’s talc. J&J is on a losing streak in the state court of St. Louis, Missouri, which has handed down three rulings against it with combined awards of $195 million to plaintiffs. The plaintiffs claim studies show J&J's Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products, when used in the vaginal area, increase the risk of ovarian cancer. The company counters that larger, more comprehensive studies show no such link. It also contends that the plaintiffs had tainted the jury pool by concentrating much of its $10 million spending on TV ads in St. Louis. Reuters
http://fortune.com/2016/11/07/ceo-daily-monday-7-november/
-
Nov 7, 2016 | Stat
By Ed Silverman
Johnson & Johnson wants to have lawsuits claiming its talcum powder caused women to develop ovarian cancer moved to a different court, Reuters reports. The health care giant is attempting this gambit after losing a $67.5 million jury verdict last month, which marked its third straight trial defeat. All three awards, totaling around $195 million, were handed down in state court in St. Louis, with the same judge presiding.
https://www.statnews.com/pharmalot/2016/11/07/proposition-61-drug-prices-powder/
-
15 Toxic Things You Don’t Know Are Poisoning Your Children
Nov 7, 2016 | Collective Evolution
By Kalee Brown
Many baby powders are talc-based, meaning that they contain high amounts of talcum powder. According to the American Cancer Society, talc in it’s natural form, which contains asbestos, can cause cancer. One of the most popular baby powders used produced by Johnson and Johnson is talc-based. The company has been sued many times and has paid millions of dollars to those who claimed their baby powder caused their cancer. The most recent case against Johnson & Johnson involved a California woman who was awarded more than $70 million in her lawsuit against the company, as she claimed their baby powder caused her ovarian cancer. Johnson & Johnson, like many other companies, fail to disclose the dangers of using their products. Although there are many all-natural alternatives available, here’s a link to a DIY Natural recipe for baby powder.
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/11/07/15-toxic-things-you-dont-know-are-poisoning-your-children/
-
Jury Awards $70 Million in Johnson & Johnson’s Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawsuit
Nov 7, 2016 | The National Law Review
By Jonathan Rosenfeld
A jury awarded a Californian woman more than $70 million dollars in Johnson & Johnson’s third straight legal loss over claims that its talcum powder is linked to ovarian cancer. There are currently over 1,700 lawsuits being brought against the pharmaceutical giant and the last three verdicts present a foreboding picture to come for Johnson & Johnson.Verdict Follows Two Similar Rulings by St. Louis Court
The claims levied against Johnson & Johnson include that the company ignored compelling evidence that talcum powder could cause cancer over an extended period of use and then refused to warn consumers regarding the link. In fact, many of the talcum products used marketing specifically to encourage use on the genitals, where it could cause bodily harm over time.
St. Louis juries have not been friendly to Johnson & Johnson, as they have delivered three straight wins for plaintiffs. The first two rulings awarded $72 million and $55 million to plaintiffs respectively and the majority of the damages awarded were punitive. Despite unresolved appeals over the first two rulings, it is becoming clear that Johnson & Johnson may be fighting a losing battle and could be held to account for its actions.Plaintiff Used Talc Products for Decades
The plaintiff awarded $70 million in the most recent talcum powder case is Deborah Giannecchini, a 62 year old woman who used Johnson & Johnson talc products for more than 40 years. She was diagnosed with ovarian cancer three years ago and her prognosis suggests that she has only a 20% chance of surviving. She is currently undergoing radiation and chemotherapy and has already been through surgery.
Of the damages awarded, $65 million was punitive and $2.5 million was awarded as a judgement against Johnson & Johnson’s talc supplier, Imerys Talc America. Jurors questioned about their ruling noted that it was evident J & J didn’t seem to have any concern over the health of the people using its products. A consensus was made that it was the company’s duty to warn consumers at the very least of the risks they faced when using the products.
Statements from Johnson & Johnson seem only to fuel the sentiment, with claims being made that science supports the safety of J & J baby powder and talc powder products. Studies over the past have told otherwise, however, and many of these studies were sanctioned and reviewed by Johnson & Johnson. There is little doubt in the minds of many people that the risks were evident for many years and Johnson & Johnson deliberately chose to hide the information from the public in order to continue selling its products.Cases Face Greater Scrutiny in New Jersey
While the three verdicts in St. Louis bode well for the thousands of women filing claims, a New Jersey court threw two cases out earlier on the claim that there was insufficient scientific evidence to support the plaintiffs’ claims. This is despite over 30 years of research that showed an elevated risk of ovarian cancer among women who used talc products compared with those who did not.
Johnson & Johnson has faced pressure before to add warnings to its product labels, but its refusal to do so is due to the fear that women will choose to use competing products that do not contain talc. There are also theories that the company has developed a strategy to avoid government regulation rather than to address safety concerns.
An appeal of this most recent judgement is imminent, but the St. Louis court seems to be much more favorable to victims of product liability than New Jersey. If the verdicts stand, Johnson & Johnson will be forced to consider a settlement offer to resolve the thousands of additional cases yet to make it to trial.
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/jury-awards-70-million-johnson-johnson-s-talcum-powder-ovarian-cancer-lawsuit
-
Mothers and Grandmother Passed yet Talcum Powder Remains
Nov 7, 2016 | Lawyers And Settlements
By Jane Mundy
Lexington Park, MLTodd, Teresa and Paula have something in common. They remember their mothers and grandmother using talcum powder up until they were diagnosed with ovarian cancer and passed away.
“My mother used talcum powder during the 1970s up until her death in 1994 of ovarian cancer,” Paula said in an email. “We had no knowledge that prolonged use of the ‘baby powder’ could lead to cancer and ultimately her death.” Paula and her family filed a complaint against Johnson & Johnson. They know that the statute of limitations may apply, in which case they wouldn’t have a claim, but on the other hand, the statute may be applied from the time they became aware of the dangers.
“I know of many different types of cases that can wave the statute of limitations based on the fact that the evidence didn’t surface about talcum powder cancer until much later,” says Paula. “I believe my mother’s case could be viewed in such a way.”
In the lawsuit (Hogans et al v. Johnson & Johnson, case number 1422-CC09012-01), the family of deceased Jackie Foxclaimed that Johnson & Johnson was aware of the potential link between talc and ovarian cancer but continued to market the product and did not properly warn consumers that they were at increased risk of ovarian cancer.
Todd was only nine years old when his mother passed away from ovarian cancer in 1991. “She used the Johnson & Johnson Talcum powder religiously,” he remembers. “She was a healthy woman before this sudden diagnosis—it came out of nowhere.”
Theresa’s grandmother also used J&J talcum powder. “She used this talc all the time and passed away from cervical cancer at the young age of 35, leaving behind my mom and three other younger siblings,” she says in an email. “These children were left to be raised by my great grandparents and an aunt. It is so unfair that my mom did not get to experience the mother /teenage daughter relationship that they should have been able to have. My mom listens to others talk about their mom being there for their graduation, their wedding, and being there for the first grandchild. It is just unfair.”Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder has been on the market from about 1894. Attorneys with Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson in St. Louis, cited in three trials (one of which resulted in a $72 million award for the family of Jackie Fox, above) research that began connecting talcum powder to ovarian cancer in the 1970s. Further, studies indicated that women who regularly use talc on their genital area have up to a 40 percent higher risk of developing ovarian cancer.
About 2,000 women nationwide have filed talcum powder cancer lawsuits, according to the Chicago law bulletin (Nov 3, 2016). With increased awareness of the association between talcum powder and cancer, lawyers are reviewing many additional cases, such as those filed by Paula, Todd and Theresa.https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/johnson-lawsuit-body-powder-talcum/interview-johnson-lawsuit-body-powder-2-21831.html
-
J&J to challenge $195M talc verdicts in appeals court
Nov 7, 2016 | News Tonight Africa
By Kehumile Mazibuko
Insisting that its talc-based products are harmless, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) has decided to challenge jury verdicts that declared the products harmful and ordered the company to compensate victims with millions of dollars.
On Oct. 27th, a California woman, who alleged that J&J’s baby powder caused her ovarian cancer, won a $67.5 million jury verdict against the company. It was the third consecutive trial defeat suffered by the company in the recent past.
Collectively, the three awards total nearly $195 million, and each of those awarded were handed down in the St. Louis state court in Missouri. The same court has received more than two thousand complaints from other women.
While many analysts suggest that the company should have hit settlements with the victims, some say that a settlement would have hurt the company’s reputation in the market.
Howard Erichson, a professor at Fordham School of Law, said, “This is not Vioxx. This is not asbestos. This is a case where the company wants to defend its brand, and is not going to be anxious to announce a big settlement that appears to concede that the product is harmful.”
Now, J&J lawyer John Beisner has announced that the company plans to challenge those verdicts in the Missouri Court of Appeals. If the court is found not to have jurisdiction, the cases will be filed again elsewhere.
http://newstonight.co.za/content/jj-challenge-195m-talc-verdicts-appeals-court
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
US Coverage
EMEA Coverage
Add recipients
Suggested