HBW Insight is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

J&J Appeal Of $2bn Talcum Powder Judgment Denied By US Supreme Court

Executive Summary

The Supreme Court said on 1 June that it would not review a $2bn verdict in Missouri for 22 women who alleged links between ovarian cancer and asbestos-tainted talc in Johnson’s Baby Powder. J&J believes the US' top court passed on an "extraordinary opportunity" that "leaves unresolved significant legal questions that state and federal courts will continue to face."

You may also be interested in...



J&J’s $4.69Bn Damages From Missouri Trial On Talc-Cancer Link Cut In Half, But Verdict Upheld

J&J’s appeal of largest verdict yet in complaints challenging safety of talc in its Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower Shimmer products failed, but a Missouri court cut its damages by more than half. Missouri appellate panel says the firm should pay $500m compensatory and $1.62bn punitive damages.

J&J’s Discontinuation Of Johnson’s Baby Powder Linked To April Federal Court Ruling

Legal experts note that J&J’s decision to end Johnson’s Baby Powder sales in the US and Canada closely followed a New Jersey federal court decision that largely denied the firm’s motions to bar testimony from plaintiff experts in multi-district talc litigation comprising around 16,000 cases.

J&J Hopes To Continue Appellate Streak Following Whopping $4.69bn Talc Verdict

Counsel for 22 women who blame J&J talcum powders for their ovarian cancer took a new approach in this latest case in St. Louis Circuit Court, arguing that asbestos in the firm’s talc is the culprit, rather than talc itself. J&J is confident in its ability to overturn the verdict, which it characterized as biased and unfounded.

Related Content

Topics

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

RS151399

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel