Jury Awards $40 Million to Two Women in Talcum Powder Case

A Los Angeles jury has ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $40 million to two women who allege that the company’s talcum powder products caused their ovarian cancer. This ruling, announced on Friday, marks a significant moment in an ongoing legal battle regarding the safety of talc in products such as Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower body powder.

The verdict awarded $18 million to Monica Kent and $22 million to Deborah Schultz and her husband. Their attorney, Daniel Robinson of the Robinson Calcagnie law firm, emphasized the loyalty of his clients, 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.”

Johnson & Johnson has announced plans to appeal the jury’s decision, asserting that it has successfully defended itself in the majority of similar cases. Erik Haas, J&J’s worldwide vice president of litigation, noted that the company has won 16 out of 17 ovarian cancer cases previously tried and described the jury’s findings as “irreconcilable with the decades of independent scientific evaluations confirming that talc is safe, does not contain asbestos, and does not cause cancer.”

The legal issues surrounding Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products have been extensive. In October 2023, a separate jury in California ordered the company to pay $966 million to the family of a woman who died of mesothelioma, a cancer linked to asbestos exposure. This case also claimed that the baby powder used by the woman was contaminated with the carcinogen.

Following years of litigation and declining sales, Johnson & Johnson ceased the global sale of talc-based baby powder in 2023. The company’s decision to transition to cornstarch-based products in North America reflects growing concerns over the safety of talc.

In addition to the recent jury verdicts, a U.S. bankruptcy court judge in April denied Johnson & Johnson’s proposal to settle $9 billion in claims related to ovarian and gynecological cancers linked to talc-based products. This ongoing legal struggle indicates the complexity and seriousness of the health claims associated with these products.

As the case continues to unfold, the implications for both the plaintiffs and Johnson & Johnson remain significant. The outcome of the appeal may set a precedent for future cases involving talcum powder and its alleged health risks.