$40M Verdict Returned in Talcum Powder Lawsuit Brought by Two Women With Ovarian Cancer

Case was the first of three “bellwether” test trials being held in California state court over ovarian cancer caused by talcum powder exposure.

A closely watched trial in California state court has ended in a $40 million verdict against Johnson & Johnson, on behalf of two women who say using the company’s talcum powder caused their ovarian cancer diagnoses, potentially signaling how juries may respond to similar evidence and testimony likely to be repeated throughout tens of thousands of other claims brought by women nationwide.

A jury in Los Angeles Superior Court returned the verdict late Friday, indicating that the manufacturer should pay $18 million to Monica Kent and $22 million to Deborah Schulze, both of whom filed talcum powder cancer lawsuits years ago, after being diagnosed with ovarian cancer.

The women’s claims are just two of the more than 90,000 Baby Powder lawsuits and Shower-to-Shower lawsuits filed in state and federal courts nationwide, each involving similar claims alleging women developed ovarian cancer or other reproductive malignancies after years of applying the powder to their genitals as a form of odor and moisture control.

Although Johnson & Johnson has continued to maintain for years that its talc powder products are safe and do not contain asbestos, the verdict is yet another example of a jury disagreeing with the company after considering evidence at trial. Additional cases are expected to go before juries over the next year if a global talcum powder settlement is not reached to resolve the claims for women with ovarian cancer.

The verdict was returned in the first of three bellwether trials scheduled in California state court, which are intended to gauge how juries respond to evidence and testimony expected to recur across hundreds of similar lawsuits.

After a trial that lasted about a month, jurors deliberated for less than a day before finding Johnson & Johnson liable for the women’s injuries. The jury concluded that the company failed to adequately warn consumers about the potential risk of ovarian cancer linked to asbestos contamination in its talc-based products.

As in earlier cases, jurors were presented with internal corporate documents suggesting Johnson & Johnson was aware for years that its talc products could be contaminated with cancer-causing asbestos, yet did not provide clear warnings. Plaintiffs argued the evidence showed the company minimized, obscured or manipulated scientific findings that could have alerted consumers and regulators much sooner.

Johnson & Johnson officials have pledged to appeal the verdict, alleging once again that the scientific evidence does not back plaintiffs’ claims. However, despite the company repeating this refrain for more than a decade, juries have unleashed several punishing verdicts after being convinced otherwise by evidence presented at trial.

In late October, a Florida jury ordered the company to pay Irene Casaretto $20 million for the death of her husband, who died of mesothelioma. Two weeks earlier, a California jury hit Johnson & Johnson with a $966 million verdict in favor of the family of another woman, Mae Moore, who died due to similar circumstances.

Talcum Powder Lawsuit Bellwether Trials

While the $40 million verdict will have no binding effect on other claims, it will be used to gauge how juries may respond to evidence and testimony that will be repeated throughout the litigation. Although Johnson & Johnson has vowed to fight every lawsuit, it is hoped that the bellwether trials will lead to some form of settlement agreement or other resolution.

The first federal bellwether trial is expected to begin early next year, and will involve a talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuit brought by Carter Judkins, who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in December 2016, after using Johnson’s Baby Powder as part of her daily routine for more than 30 years.

There are also other trials scheduled for next year in New Jersey and Pennsylvania state courts.

If the parties do not reach a talcum powder cancer lawsuit settlement agreement after the trials have concluded, judges may have to begin planning individual trial dates for a mass of lengthy and expensive litigation that would heavily burden state and federal court systems.