A Los Angeles jury has awarded $40 million to two women who alleged that Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products contributed to their ovarian cancer diagnoses. The verdict, delivered on Friday, amounts to $18 million for Monica Kent and $22 million for Deborah Schultz and her husband. The healthcare giant has signaled its intention to appeal the jury’s findings of liability and the accompanying damages.
This ruling is part of an ongoing legal struggle surrounding claims that the talc in Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products is linked to ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, a serious cancer affecting the lungs and other organs. In a significant move, Johnson & Johnson ceased the global sale of talc-based powders in 2023 after facing mounting legal pressures.
The latest case adds to a history of substantial jury decisions against the company. Notably, another California jury previously ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $966 million to the family of a woman who died from mesothelioma, asserting that her cancer resulted from contamination of baby powder with asbestos, a known carcinogen.
Daniel Robinson, the attorney representing the two women, emphasized their long-standing loyalty as customers of Johnson & Johnson, stating, “The only thing they did was be loyal to Johnson & Johnson as a customer for only 50 years. That loyalty was a one-way street.”
In response, Erik Haas, Johnson & Johnson’s vice president of litigation, pointed out that the company has successfully defended itself in 16 of the 17 ovarian cancer cases it has previously litigated and is optimistic about overturning this latest verdict upon appeal. Haas critiqued the jury’s findings, asserting they conflict with numerous independent scientific evaluations that have concluded talc is safe, asbestos-free, and does not cause cancer.
In a strategic shift, Johnson & Johnson replaced the talc in its baby powder sold in most of North America with cornstarch starting in 2020 following a decline in sales. Additionally, in April, a U.S. bankruptcy court judge rejected the company’s plan to allocate $9 billion to settle various claims related to ovarian and other gynecological cancers associated with talc-based products. The outcome of these ongoing legal battles continues to raise questions about the safety and regulatory status of talc in consumer products.
