Preview Newsletter
Herford Talc Verdict Report
-
J&J wins Calif. lawsuit claiming asbestos in talc caused cancer
Nov 16, 2017 | Reuters
By Nate Raymond
A California jury on Thursday ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit by a woman who said she developed the cancer mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company's talc-based products including J&J's Baby Powder. -
Bloomberg Terminal
Nov 16, 2017 | Bloomberg Terminal
By Margaret Cronin Fisk and Jason Booth
Johnson & Johnson isn’t responsible for causing cancer in a 61-year-old California woman who claimed the company’s talc products were contaminated with asbestos, a Los Angeles jury said. -
BREAKING: J&J, Talc Supplier Not Liable For Woman's Asbestos Illness
Nov 16, 2017 | Law360
By Daniel Siegal
A California jury on Thursday cleared Johnson & Johnson and its talc supplier of any liability for a woman’s terminal mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, holding there was no evidence the companies’ talcum powder was unsafe. -
BREAKING: J&J Scores 1st Trial Victory Over Claims Its Talc Products Cause Mesothelioma
Nov 16, 2017 | Courtroom View Network
By David Siegel
A California state court jury handed a major win to Johnson & Johnson Thursday, determining that the company is not responsible for a woman’s cancer that she claims she developed from inhaling asbestos fibers in popular talc-based hygiene products. -
J&J Gains Defense Verdict in First Trial Linking Talc Product to Mesothelioma
Nov 16, 2017 | Law.com
By Amanda Bronstad
A California jury has sided with Johnson & Johnson in the first trial over whether its iconic baby powder caused a woman to get mesothelioma. -
A Win for Johnson & Johnson in Baby Powder-Mesothelioma Case
Nov 16, 2017 | Fair Warning
By Myron Levin
A California jury on Thursday rejected claims that Johnson & Johnson and its talc supplier were responsible for the deadly cancer of a woman who blamed her illness on breathing asbestos fibers from contaminated body powders. -
J&J notches latest win in long-running talc saga as caseload grows to 5,500
Nov 17, 2017 | FiercePharma
By Eric Sagonowsky
As the number of pending talc cases continues to tick upward, Johnson & Johnson is maintaining its defensive winning streak. On Thursday, jurors in Los Angeles sided with the company against a plaintiff who argued her mesothelioma was the result of talc use and that the product contains cancer-causing asbestos. -
Johnson & Johnson Won a Lawsuit against Women Claiming Asbestos Fibers in Body Talc Caused Her Cancer
Nov 17, 2017 | Swift Nary
By Pooja
Johnson & Johnson, American multinational pharmaceutical and medical devices manufacturing company on Thursday has won the lawsuit in California, claimed by women saying that she developed Mesothelioma sort of cancer after exposing to asbestos in talc-based products that involved Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder. -
Jurors reject claim that asbestos in talcum powder caused mesothelioma
Nov 17, 2017 | ABA Journal
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Jurors in Pasadena, California, have found no liability in a lawsuit by a woman who said that she contracted mesothelioma by inhaling asbestos in baby powder. -
Johnson & Johnson WINS cancer lawsuit in California - minutes before losing a $247 million case in Texas over faulty hip replacements
Nov 17, 2017 | Daily Mail
By Mia De Graaf
Johnson & Johnson has won a lawsuit in California against a woman who claimed the brand's baby powder gave her cancer. -
Johnson & Johnson Found Not Liable in California Talcum Trial
Nov 17, 2017 | Asbestos Case Tracker
By Timothy Connor
After almost three days of deliberation following a four week trial, a Los Angeles area jury reached a defense verdict in a mesothelioma case against Johnson & Johnson and its supplier Imerys Talc America, Inc. -
J&J Cleared of Mesothelioma Claim in Talc Trial
Nov 17, 2017 | Mesh News Desk
The California talc trial would be the first in a series of cases against Johnson & Johnson over its talcum powder, claiming the talc caused mesothelioma, a lung disease related to asbestos. -
Johnson & Johnson wins California lawsuit claiming asbestos in talc caused cancer
Nov 17, 2017 | Asbestos Hub
By Tom Lamb
A California jury on Thursday ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit by a woman who said she developed the cancer mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company’s talc-based products including J&J’s Baby Powder. -
J&J wins California lawsuit claiming asbestos in baby powder caused cancer
Nov 17, 2017 | Seeking Alpha
By Carl Surran
A California jury today ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) in a lawsuit by a woman who said she developed mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company's talc-based products including its Baby Powder -
The Now Denver
| KMGH (ABC)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780343?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5 -
Fox 5 Morning News at 5am
Nov 17, 2017 | KSWB (Fox)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780434?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5 -
News 12 Long Island
Nov 17, 2017 | N12LI
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780422?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5 -
ABC7 News 5AM
Nov 17, 2017 | KGO (ABC)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780444?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5 -
Fox 8 News 6AM
Nov 17, 2017 | WGHP (FOX)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780465?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5
Traditional Media Coverage
Broadcast Media Coverage
-
J&J wins Calif. lawsuit claiming asbestos in talc caused cancer
Nov 16, 2017 | Reuters
By Nate Raymond
(Reuters) - A California jury on Thursday ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit by a woman who said she developed the cancer mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company’s talc-based products including J&J’s Baby Powder.
The Los Angeles Superior Court jury’s verdict came in the first trial centering on claims that J&J’s talc products contained asbestos. J&J is separately battling thousands of cases claiming those products can also cause ovarian cancer.
The verdict came in a lawsuit by Tina Herford, who said she developed mesothelioma after using J&J talcum powder products that her lawyers claimed contained asbestos.
Reuters watched the verdict through an online broadcast by Courtroom View Network. The jury also found in favor of talc supplier Imerys Talc.
J&J in a statement welcomed the verdict. J&J said it believed that setbacks dealt to individuals pursuing ovarian cancer cases had “forced plaintiff attorneys to pivot to yet another baseless theory.”
“Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer,” J&J said.
Chris Panatier, Herford’s lawyer, in an email cautioned against reading too much into a single verdict.
“It is a matter of time before juries begin holding them to account,” he said.
The verdict came as a federal jury, separately, ordered J&J to pay $247 million to six patients who said they were injured by defective Pinnacle hip implants.
Mesothelioma is a deadly form of cancer closely associated with exposure to asbestos. It affects the delicate tissue that lines body cavities, most often around the lungs, but also in the abdomen and elsewhere.
Herford’s lawyers contended that internal J&J documents showed the New Jersey-based company for decades was aware of the presence of asbestos in the talc that was used in its products but kept selling them anyway.
J&J faces lawsuits by around 5,500 plaintiffs nationally asserting talc-related claims, largely based on claims it failed to warn women about the risk of developing ovarian cancer from the products.
In five trials in Missouri involving ovarian cancer lawsuits, juries found J&J liable four times and awarded the plaintiffs $307 million. In California, a jury awarded a now-deceased woman $417 million.
But in October, J&J scored major victories when a Missouri appellate court threw out the first verdict there for $72 million and a California judge tossed the $417 million verdict.
The case is Herford et al v. AT&T Corp et al, Los Angeles Superior Court, No. BC646315.
-
Nov 16, 2017 | Bloomberg Terminal
By Margaret Cronin Fisk and Jason Booth
(Bloomberg) -- Johnson & Johnson isn’t responsible for causing cancer in a 61-year-old California woman who claimed the company’s talc products were contaminated with asbestos, a Los Angeles jury said.
Tina Herford, who used J&J’s baby powder for more than 30 years, blamed the product for her 2016 diagnosis of mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lungs primarily caused by asbestos exposure. She is expected to die within six to eight months, her lawyers said.
J&J said its talc products are free of asbestos fibers and argued that Herford’s disease was caused by radiation treatment for breast cancer in the 1990s.
-
BREAKING: J&J, Talc Supplier Not Liable For Woman's Asbestos Illness
Nov 16, 2017 | Law360
By Daniel Siegal
A California jury on Thursday cleared Johnson & Johnson and its talc supplier of any liability for a woman’s terminal mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, holding there was no evidence the companies’ talcum powder was unsafe.
After roughly two days of deliberations following the nearly-four-week trial, the Pasadena, California jury returned with a verdict for J&J and its co-defendant Imerys Talc America Inc. The jury rejected plaintiffs Tina Herford's and Doug Herford's allegations that Imerys had supplied, and J&J sold, talc containing asbestos, and that Tina Herford’s illness could be attributed to her use of J&J’s products.
The jury found that J&J did not negligently design or sell its talc, that the talc did not fail to perform as safely as a reasonable consumer would have expected, that the talc was not defective, and that J&J did not fail to warn of any potential risks, "known or knowable based on general scientific knowledge at time of sale."
During Monday’s closing arguments, Morton Dubin of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, representing J&J, had told the jury that Tina Herford didn’t have the “hallmarks” of asbestos exposure, such as specific scarring in the lung tissue or asbestos fibers in her lung tissue itself, and that the actual likely cause of her illness was radiation treatment she received in the late 1990s to treat breast cancer.
The Herfords filed suit in January against a host of companies, claiming they were responsible for asbestos that caused Tina Herford’s mesothelioma. The case headed to trial earlier this month with claims against J&J and Imerys.
On Oct. 10, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge C. Edward Simpson declared a mistrial because Tina Herford, who took the stand as the first witness in her case Oct. 6, violated a court order by mentioning the alleged link between J&J’s talc and ovarian cancer, according to attorneys for the parties. A new jury was empaneled for a retrial shortly thereafter.
On Monday, Chris Panatier of Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett PC, representing the plaintiffs argued that Tina Herford’s illness lay at the feet of J&J, because there were “so many documents” that showed the company had for decades been aware of testing showing there were asbestos minerals in its talc mines, first in Italy and later in Vermont, but did nothing.
Panatier asked the jury to award his clients over $23 million in damages, arguing that the defendants had chosen to watch out for their bottom line instead of consumers.
On Thursday the jury disagreed, finding that the defendants' talc was safe, and awarding the plaintiffs nothing.
The Herfords’ trial comes in the wake of multiple lawsuits that have accused J&J’s talcum powder of causing harm — not through any alleged asbestos link, but rather because the powder itself supposedly causes ovarian cancer when applied to a woman’s genital area. J&J has been hit with verdicts in the tens of millions of dollars and above, although some of those verdicts have already been overturned by trial and appellate courts.
The Herfords are represented by Jay Stuemke and Chris Panatier of Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett PC.
J&J is represented by Sharla J. Frost of Tucker Ellis LLP, Morton Dubin of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, and Alexander Calfo of King & Spalding LLP.
Imerys is represented by Todd Benoff and Peter Masaitis of Alston & Bird LLP.
The case is Tina Herford et al. v. Johnson & Johnson et al., case number BC646315, consolidated in LAOSD Asbestos Cases, case number JCCP4674, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.
-
BREAKING: J&J Scores 1st Trial Victory Over Claims Its Talc Products Cause Mesothelioma
Nov 16, 2017 | Courtroom View Network
By David Siegel
Pasadena - A California state court jury handed a major win to Johnson & Johnson Thursday, determining that the company is not responsible for a woman’s cancer that she claims she developed from inhaling asbestos fibers in popular talc-based hygiene products.
The lawsuit filed by plaintiff Tina Herford and her husband Doug Herford was the first in the nation to go to trial over allegations that J&J’s talc products caused mesothelioma, a generally fatal cancer affecting the lining of the lungs that is frequently associated with asbestos exposure.
The verdict, reached after jurors heard 17 days of argument and testimony, represents a substantial victory for J&J and co-defendant Imerys Talc America, their talc supplier. The Herfords attorney, Chris Panatier of Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett PC, had asked the jury to award the couple $24 million, arguing the J&J and Imerys knew for years that their talc products contained asbestos but withheld that knowledge from consumers.
J&J and Imerys maintained throughout the trial that the products Tina Herford used like Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower never contained asbestos, and that her mesothelioma was caused by radiation treatments she received for breast cancer during the 1990’s.
Over the last two years numerous juries in Missouri and California hit J&J with massive verdicts over claims that women developed ovarian cancer as a result of using talc-based powders on their genitals. The Herfords trial was the first time a jury weighed in on the presence of asbestos in powder allegedly inhaled by a plaintiff.
The headline-grabbing ovarian cancer verdicts, including a $417 million verdict awarded by a California jury this summer that a judge later threw out, spurred thousands of women throughout the country to file similar lawsuits. A large award in this initial case would have likely caused a wave of similar claims from a new and potentially widespread group of plaintiffs.
While additional asbestos-related talc trials involving J&J are pending, including one set to begin in early 2018 in New Jersey state court, this initial defense verdict nonetheless represents a key development in what could potentially be an entirely new front in talc-related litigation involving J&J and Imerys.
J&J spokesperson Carol Goodrich told CVN that the claim J&J’s talc products caused mesothelioma is a “baseless theory” that plaintiff attorneys have adopted after the reversals of ovarian cancer verdicts in Missouri and California and a New Jersey judge’s decision to throw out similar claims on summary judgment.
“Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer,” Goodrich said. “We will continue to defend the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder in future trials.”
Imerys spokesperson Gwen Myers told CVN that the company commends the jury for following the science that she said establishes the safety of the talc the company supplied to J&J.
“Imerys sympathizes with anyone suffering from cancer, but there is no evidence that talc caused Ms. Herford’s cancer,” Myers said. “The jury’s decision is consistent with a recently published study of workers who mined and milled talc all day over the course of more than 50 years that did not find a single case of mesothelioma. Imerys follows all FDA and other regulatory guidelines and utilizes rigorous testing to ensure that our talc meets the highest quality standards."
During his closing argument on behalf of the plaintiffs, Chris Panatier set up a number of miniature red flags in the courtroom (a tactic that worked for him successfully in the past) to represent the warning signs he claimed J&J and Imerys ignored that their talc contained asbestos.
“Before you walked in here, I don’t think any of us had any inclination there was asbestos in J&J’s products, and there is,” Pantier told the jury. “It’s in the mines, and it’s in the finished product.”
Panatier told jurors that J&J and Imerys successfully lobbied the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to approve testing methods that weren’t sensitive enough to detect the asbestos present in talc.
“That’s been the game all along. This was the goal, to create a test that would get them a ‘non-detect,’” Panatier said.
He did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CVN.
Without using actual flags, J&J attorney Morton Dubin of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP’s New York office used the same metaphor, describing the “red flags” in the plaintiffs case, including supposed inconsistent statements regarding how long Tina Herford used talc powder products. He presented a form Herford provided to a doctor stating she only used talc products for six to eight years during her childhood, but she later testified that she used talc powders on a daily basis for 35 years.
He also relied on expert testimony offered on J&J’s behalf from an oncologist who stated that the radiation treatments Herford received to treat her breast cancer could have been the primary cause for the mesothelioma that later developed in the same part of her chest.
Attorneys for both J&J and Imerys told jurors that there was no indication that talc miners ever developed mesothelioma from inhaling the mineral, and that no epidemiological study ever showed a clear link between talc exposure and mesothelioma.
Given the stakes involved in this initial trial, an army of attorneys from across the country descended on Judge C. Edward Simpson’s Los Angeles County courtroom. Chris Panatier is based out of Texas, and in addition to outside counsel from Orrick’s NYC office, J&J was also represented by Sharla Frost out of Tucker Ellis LLP’s Houston office, along with local California counsel Alexander Calfo of King & Spalding.
Imerys relied entirely on local counsel, represented by Todd Benoff and Peter Masaitis out of Alston & Bird’s Los Angeles office.
The full trial is available online for CVN subscribers, along with numerous talc and asbestos trials that are also available for on-demand viewing as part of CVN's one-of-a-kind online trial archive.
The case is Tina Herford et al. v. Johnson & Johnson et al., case number BC646315, consolidated in LAOSD Asbestos Cases, case number JCCP4674, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.
-
J&J Gains Defense Verdict in First Trial Linking Talc Product to Mesothelioma
Nov 16, 2017 | Law.com
By Amanda Bronstad
A California jury has sided with Johnson & Johnson in the first trial over whether its iconic baby powder caused a woman to get mesothelioma.
Thursday’s verdict came in a trial that began on Oct. 19 in Los Angeles Superior Court. The jury found on Thursday that Johnson & Johnson did not negligently manufacture or design its baby powder and Shower to Shower products or fail to warn that its talcum powder products caused mesothelioma, according to coverage of the trial by Courtroom View Network. The jury also sided with Imerys Talc America Inc., a talc supplier, in its verdict.
The trial is separate from the nearly 5,000 cases alleging Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products caused women to get ovarian cancer. In those cases, juries in Missouri and California have come out with five verdicts ranging from $55 million to $417 million – though two awards have since been tossed out. Unlike those cases, which have focused on the alleged links between Johnson & Johnson’s talc products and ovarian cancer, the mesothelioma cases target whether cosmetic talc products contained asbestos, which is known to cause mesothelioma.
“We are pleased with today’s verdict and believe that the dismissal of talc lawsuits in New Jersey and verdict reversals in Missouri and California have forced plaintiff attorneys to pivot to yet another baseless theory,” said Carol Goodrich, a Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman. “Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer. We will continue to defend the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder in future trials.”
Lead plaintiffs attorney Chris Panatier of Dallas-based Simon Greenstone Panatier said the verdict would have little effect on future trials.
“The talc/asbestos case is extremely complicated, dealing with all manner of microscopic techniques and mineralogy etc.,” he wrote in an email. “It’s our job to make all of that accessible and though I tried to do that, perhaps it wasn’t enough. Also, from my conversations with a few of the jurors, it sounded like this simply was not a jury that was going to find for a plaintiff. I accept that. It happens.”
He said Johnson & Johnson was still selling “contaminated baby powder.”
“It is a matter of time before juries begin holding them to account,” he wrote. “We just missed on the first one. ”
The trial is the latest to bring asbestos claims over talc-based cosmetic products. Other suits have been brought against the Colgate-Palmolive Co. and talc distributor Whittaker, Clark & Daniels over products like Old Spice, Cashmere Bouquet and Desert Flower. In 2013, a New Jersey jury in Middlesex County Superior Court awarded a $1.6 million verdict against Whittaker, Clark & Daniels. On April 7, a Manhattan Supreme Court jury awarded $16.5 million to a plaintiff in a case against Whittaker, Clark & Daniels.
On Oct. 27, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury awarded $18.07 million against Whittaker Clark & Daniels in another case handled by Simon Greenstone. In that case, the firm represented former Los Angeles mayoral aide Philip Depoian, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2015.
Panatier also secured a $13 million asbestos verdict against Colgate-Palmolive in 2015.
Colgate-Palmolive has moved to dismiss the first asbestos-related talc case in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas after a judge barred two plaintiffs’ experts from testifying on some causation issues.
In the Los Angeles case, the plaintiff, Tina Herford, claimed that she got mesothelioma after using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder.
“She used the product for 35 years and got mesothelioma,” said Panatier at Monday’s closing arguments, according to Courtroom View Network’s coverage. He dotted the courtroom with actual red flags to demonstrate that Johnson & Johnson knew it had an asbestos problem but didn’t do anything to change its talc products.
In court, defense lawyers argued that other exposures – such as therapeutic radiation treatments and clothing worn by her father, who was exposed to asbestos at his job — may have caused Herford’s mesothelioma.
“It’s a red flag about whether you’re hearing the whole story from the plaintiffs,” said Johnson & Johnson attorney Morton Dubin, a partner at Orrick in New York, in closing arguments on Monday, according to Courtroom View Network. Johnson & Johnson also was represented at trial by Orrick partner Peter Bicks; Sharla Frost, a partner at Tucker Ellis in Houston; and King & Spalding partner Alexander Calfo in Los Angeles. Imerys was represented by Alston & Bird partners Todd Benoff and Peter Masaitis, both in Los Angeles.
-
A Win for Johnson & Johnson in Baby Powder-Mesothelioma Case
Nov 16, 2017 | Fair Warning
By Myron Levin
A California jury on Thursday rejected claims that Johnson & Johnson and its talc supplier were responsible for the deadly cancer of a woman who blamed her illness on breathing asbestos fibers from contaminated body powders.
On a 9-3 vote, the jury in Pasadena absolved J&J of negligence in the sale of Johnson’s Baby Powder and another talc product, Shower to Shower. The Los Angeles Superior Court jury also cleared Imerys Talc America, Inc., a supplier of talc to J&J.
The case was brought by Tina Herford, who suffers from mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, and her husband Douglas Herford. Their lawsuit claimed that during the 35 years Tina Herford used the powders–first as a baby when she was dusted by her mother–they contained traces of asbestos.
Tina Herford, 61, of Camarillo, California, was diagnosed last year and, according to testimony in the four-week trial, is likely to survive for just a few more months. Mesothelioma, an almost invariably fatal cancer of the lining of the lung or abdomen, is strongly linked to asbestos exposure. But Herford had received aggressive radiation treatments for breast cancer in 1998, and therapeutic radiation is also known to raise the risk of mesothelioma. Lawyers for J&J and Imerys argued that the radiation treatments–not use of talc powders–had caused her mesothelioma.
The Herford case was distinct from the flood of lawsuits against J&J by ovarian cancer victims who say they contracted the disease from use of the company’s talc powders for feminine hygiene. More than 5,000 talc-ovarian cancer cases are pending in courts across the country, most of them in Missouri, California and New Jersey. In the few ovarian cancer cases tried so far, plaintiffs blamed the talc itself–not asbestos–as the cause of the disease. Juries found J&J liable in five of the six cases and awarded huge damages. But two of those verdicts have been reversed and the other three appear likely to be stricken on appeal.
“We are pleased with today’s verdict and believe that the dismissal of talc lawsuits in New Jersey and verdict reversals in Missouri and California have forced plaintiff attorneys to pivot to yet another baseless theory,” said J&J spokeswoman Carol Goodrich in a prepared statement. “Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer,” she said.
“Imerys commends the jury for following the science that establishes the safety of our talc,” a company spokeswoman said. “Imerys sympathizes with anyone suffering from cancer, but there is no evidence that talc caused Ms. Herford’s cancer.”
Herford and her lead attorney Chris Panatier could not immediately be reached for comment.
Talc, the softest of minerals, has been widely used in body powders and cosmetics, as a filler in capsules and pills, and even to polish rice and keep chewing gum from sticking to the wrapper. But talc deposits sometimes are contaminated by asbestos, which can cause fatal diseases in those who inhale its microscopic, lung-scarring fibers.
During the trial, Herford’s lawyers put into evidence lab reports to J&J in the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s that they said proved that there was asbestos in talc supplied to the company and even in its finished talc products powders. They also introduced results of microscopic tests that they said found asbestos fibers in old containers of J&J powders that were purchased from collectors or on eBay.
Defense lawyers disputed the findings, saying they were not confirmed by subsequent testing, or that non-asbestos particles had been mistaken for asbestos.
The trial was the first against J&J alleging that asbestos-contaminated talc powders caused mesothelioma. Dozens of similar cases are pending against the company and other suppliers and makers of cosmetic talc products.
-
J&J notches latest win in long-running talc saga as caseload grows to 5,500
Nov 17, 2017 | FiercePharma
By Eric Sagonowsky
As the number of pending talc cases continues to tick upward, Johnson & Johnson is maintaining its defensive winning streak. On Thursday, jurors in Los Angeles sided with the company against a plaintiff who argued her mesothelioma was the result of talc use and that the product contains cancer-causing asbestos.
The case was brought by Tina Herford, who said talc use caused her to develop mesothelioma, according to Reuters.
A J&J spokesperson said the company is "pleased" with the verdict and believes "the dismissal of talc lawsuits in New Jersey and verdict reversals in Missouri and California have forced plaintiff attorneys to pivot to yet another baseless theory."
"Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer," the company's spokesperson said via email. "We will continue to defend the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder in future trials.”
The plaintiff's attorney, in an email to Reuters, said "it's a matter of time before juries begin holding them to account."
As J&J continues to defend its talc powder, the company has its hands full. The drug giant is named in 5,500 lawsuits alleging the product caused harm, according to its most recent quarterly filing with the SEC.
Despite some early losses, the company has managed to get nearly $500 million in verdicts reversed. The company has also prevailed in getting two New Jersey cases thrown out and won a trial in Missouri.
Last month, the company won an appeal of a record $417 million verdict in Los Angeles. That development followed another successful appeal of a $72 million verdict in St. Louis.
Apart from those cases, the company has suffered losses in St. Louis worth $55 million, $70 million and $110 million and has said it will appeal in each instance. On the asbestos claim, J&J faces a separate lawsuit alleging the company's talc "is not now, nor has it ever been, free from asbestos and asbestiform fiber." J&J disputed the allegation by pointing to results from the FDA and independent testing of the product.
-
Nov 17, 2017 | Swift Nary
By Pooja
Johnson & Johnson, American multinational pharmaceutical and medical devices manufacturing company on Thursday has won the lawsuit in California, claimed by women saying that she developed Mesothelioma sort of cancer after exposing to asbestos in talc-based products that involved Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder.
Tina Herford was the woman, who brought the case against Johnson & Johnson. Mesothelioma is type of cancer, which is closely associated with the asbestos exposure and affects the exquisite tissues lining body cavities, usually often near the lungs as well as in abdomen and elsewhere.
A Director of Global Media Relations at the Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., Carol Goodrich said in a statement that, “We are pleased with today’s verdict and believe that the dismissal of talc lawsuits in New Jersey and verdict reversals in Missouri and California have forced plaintiff attorneys to pivot to yet another baseless theory. Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer. Imerys commends the jury for following the science that establishes the safety of our talc”
While leading attorney, Chris Panatier at the Herfords said in a statement that, “Even when I disagree with a jury’s decision, I often understand their perspective. J&J is still selling contaminated baby powder. It is a matter of time before juries begin holding them to account. We just missed on the first one.”
However, there are dozens of cases pending regarding talc powder-mesothelioma against Johnson & Johnson and many other suppliers and manufacturers of such products.
-
Jurors reject claim that asbestos in talcum powder caused mesothelioma
Nov 17, 2017 | ABA Journal
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Jurors in Pasadena, California, have found no liability in a lawsuit by a woman who said that she contracted mesothelioma by inhaling asbestos in baby powder.
Jurors on Thursday ruled against Tina Herford in her lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson and a talc supplier, report Reuters, Courtroom View Network, Law360 (sub. req.) and Law.com (sub. req.).
Lawyers for Herford had contended Johnson & Johnson ignored warning signs that its products contained asbestos. The company said the products used by Herford didn’t contain asbestos and she likely became sick from radiation treatments for breast cancer.
The verdict is the first in a trial that sought to hold Johnson & Johnson liable for asbestos in its products, though cases against different defendants have produced multimillion dollar verdicts.
Johnson & Johnson is fighting thousands of other suits claiming its baby powder causes ovarian cancer.
J&J spokesperson Carol Goodrich told Courtroom View Network that the mesothelioma claim is baseless. “Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer,” Goodrich said.
-
Nov 17, 2017 | Daily Mail
By Mia De Graaf
Johnson & Johnson has won a lawsuit in California against a woman who claimed the brand's baby powder gave her cancer.
But minutes later, the firm lost a $247 million case in Texas over faulty hip replacements made by its orthopedic brand.
Meanwhile, J&J faces lawsuits by around 5,500 plaintiffs nationally asserting talc-related claims, largely based on claims it failed to warn women about the risk of developing ovarian cancer from the products.
The California case was brought by Tina Herford, a California resident who claimed she developed the cancer mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company's talc-based products including J&J's Baby Powder.
She was hardly the first to do so. J&J is separately battling thousands of cases claiming those products can also cause ovarian cancer. Last month, another woman who requested $417 million claiming talc gave her ovarian cancer was overruled by a California court.
This, however, was the first time a plaintiff has claimed that the talcum powder contains asbestos.
Nonetheless, on Thursday, the jury in Los Angeles Superior Court ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson.
The jury also went in favor of talc supplier Imerys Talc.
J&J welcomed the verdict, saying it believed that setbacks dealt to individuals pursuing ovarian cancer cases had 'forced plaintiff attorneys to pivot to yet another baseless theory.'
'Johnson's Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer,' J&J said.
Chris Panatier, Herford's lawyer, cautioned against reading too much into a single verdict.
'It is a matter of time before juries begin holding them to account,' he said.
Mesothelioma is a deadly form of cancer closely associated with exposure to asbestos. It affects the delicate tissue that lines body cavities, most often around the lungs, but also in the abdomen and elsewhere.
Herford's lawyers contended that internal J&J documents showed the New Jersey-based company for decades was aware of the presence of asbestos in the talc that was used in its products but kept selling them anyway.
The verdict came as a federal jury in Dallas ordered J&J and its DePuy Orthopaedics unit to pay $247 million to six patients who said they were injured by defective Pinnacle hip implants.
Delivering a third straight win to patients, the jury found that the metal-on-metal hip implants were defectively designed and that the companies failed to warn consumers about the risks.
Six New York residents implanted with the devices said they experienced tissue death, bone erosion and other injuries they blamed on design flaws.
J&J, which faces more than 9,700 Pinnacle lawsuits in state and federal courts across the United States, said in a statement it would immediately begin the appeal process.
A DePuy spokeswoman said the company was still 'committed to the long-term defense of the allegations in these lawsuits,' adding that the metal-on-metal hip implants were backed by a strong record of clinical data showing they were effective.
-
Johnson & Johnson Found Not Liable in California Talcum Trial
Nov 17, 2017 | Asbestos Case Tracker
By Timothy Connor
After almost three days of deliberation following a four week trial, a Los Angeles area jury reached a defense verdict in a mesothelioma case against Johnson & Johnson and its supplier Imerys Talc America, Inc. In closing arguments, the plaintiff urged the jury to consider evidence that allegedly documented Johnson & Johnson’s long awareness of asbestos contamination in its talc mines in attributing the plaintiff’s disease to the defendants. Defense arguments focused on a lack of asbestos markers in the plaintiff’s lungs, and pointed to breast cancer radiation treatments as an alternate cause of the mesothelioma. The jury found that the defendants’ talc was not defective or unsafe, that the defendants did not fail to warn of potential risks, that the talc was not negligently designed, and that the talc did not fail to perform safely under consumer expectations.
-
J&J Cleared of Mesothelioma Claim in Talc Trial
Nov 17, 2017 | Mesh News Desk
The California talc trial would be the first in a series of cases against Johnson & Johnson over its talcum powder, claiming the talc caused mesothelioma, a lung disease related to asbestos.
The jury deliberated two days to deny the claim in this talc trial.
Tina and Doug Herford claimed that Imerys supplied the talc used to make Johnson and Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower. Four weeks ago they took that claim before a California state court jury.
After an initial mistrial, due to a mention of the powder’s alleged link to ovarian cancer, opening arguments began again October 20th before Judge C. Edward Simpson in Los Angeles County Superior Court in Pasadena.
Thursday, the jury decided, not just for J&J but for its talc supplier, Imerys Talc America Inc.
J&J publishes 5 Facts about Talc on its website (here).
Herford claims she used Baby Powder and Shower to Shower beginning in the 1950’s.
In 2016, she was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a deadly lung disease generally associated in people who work around asbestos. Mesothelioma, which can also occur elsewhere around the body, takes decades to grow in the body after exposure.
The plaintiffs asserted that J&J used talc tainted with asbestos, which occurs naturally in talc deposits.
Plaintiffs’ attorney Chris Panatier, of Greenstone Panatier Bartlett PC, said J&J has known for decades its talcum powder contained asbestos and instead of telling the public, intentionally concealed that information.
Tests on the J&J talc products showed 250,000 fibers of asbestos per gram on average. Panatier asked the jurors for $24 million in compensation.
Sharla Frost of Tucker Ellis, representing J&J, countered that Herford had treatment for breast cancer and underwent extensive radiation treatment and that led to her mesothelioma.
The attorney for Imerys told jurors the talc they mined for J&J never contained asbestos.
While a series of personal injury cases has been won by plaintiffs who claim J&J’s talcum powder caused their ovarian cancer, this was the first to claim the asbestos contained in the talc caused her fatal lung cancer.
Had the plaintiffs been successful, it could have opened the door to similar complaints.
Meanwhile, juries have delivered hundreds of millions of dollars to women or their estates (in the case of those who have died) who claim the powders are linked to ovarian cancer.
J&J still has no warning on its baby powder and personal hygiene powders, unlike other powder makers whose label contains a warning about a possible link to ovarian cancer with extended use.
The talc-ovarian cancer litigation has grown to more than 5,000 plaintiffs with most of the personal injury litigation heard in St. Louis, Missouri. ###
-
Johnson & Johnson wins California lawsuit claiming asbestos in talc caused cancer
Nov 17, 2017 | Asbestos Hub
By Tom Lamb
A California jury on Thursday ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit by a woman who said she developed the cancer mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company’s talc-based products including J&J’s Baby Powder.
The Los Angeles Superior Court jury’s verdict came in the first trial centering on claims that J&J’s talc products contained asbestos. J&J is separately battling thousands of cases claiming those products can also cause ovarian cancer.
The verdict came in a lawsuit by Tina Herford, who said she developed mesothelioma after using J&J talcum powder products that her lawyers claimed contained asbestos.
-
J&J wins California lawsuit claiming asbestos in baby powder caused cancer
Nov 17, 2017 | Seeking Alpha
By Carl Surran
A California jury today ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) in a lawsuit by a woman who said she developed mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in the company's talc-based products including its Baby Powder.
The Los Angeles Superior Court jury’s verdict occurred in the first trial involving thousands of claims that J&J’s talc products caused mesothelioma or ovarian cancer.
“Johnson’s Baby Powder has been around since 1894 and it does not contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma or ovarian cancer,” the company says.
-
| KMGH (ABC)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780343?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5
-
Nov 17, 2017 | KSWB (Fox)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780434?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5
-
Nov 17, 2017 | N12LI
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780422?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5
-
Nov 17, 2017 | KGO (ABC)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780444?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5
-
Nov 17, 2017 | WGHP (FOX)
https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#clip/view/30780465?token=aa2cde5a-40b1-40f9-a503-9fbfad6b57a5
Traditional Media Coverage
Broadcast Media Coverage
Add recipients
Suggested