California Judge Reverses $417 Million Lawsuit Against Johnson & Johnson
For a long time, Johnson & Johnson had been accused of not properly labeling their products. Namely, they have many products that contain a substance known as talc, which may carry risks for cancer. A few months back, a woman with ovarian cancer filed a lawsuit against the American-based, multinational manufacturing company claiming that her use of its baby powder contributed to her disease. At the time, the jury verdict was in favor of this woman's plight, awarding her over 400 million dollars in damages.
The $417 million reward was reversed, and Johnson & Johnson's request for retrial was approved.
But recently, a California Judge has overruled this verdict and reversed this $417 million-dollar reward. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Maren Nelson felt that the woman's claims lacked the evidence necessary to prove Johnson & Johnson's direct responsibility for causing her cancer. The corporation had requested a re-trial and Nelson granted them their wish.
Both parties lacked evidence
When asked about why he had chosen to reverse this verdict, Nelson explains that there were many errors on both sides of the argument during the previous trial. Unfortunately, he was not convinced that either party had gathered enough strong evidence to favor one side over the other. And when talking the excessive amounts of damages claimed, Nelson felt that the verdict was reached too hastily. Furthermore, he reports that there was also jury misconduct during the previous trial, which puts the original verdict on ever shakier grounds. After the trial had taken place, two jurors stepped forward to declare three members of their jury as improperly excluded from determining damages. Two of these people voted in favor of Johnson & Johnson.
Echeverria and her lawyer's plan to fight back
Eva Echeverria is a California resident and the woman who filed the lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson. During the first trial, she won over the jury and was awarded $70 million in compensation and $357 million as punitive damages against the company. Upon hearing about the judge reversal, her lawyer, Mark Robinson, plans to appeal the re-trial immediately. Robinson plans to fight on, supporting women everywhere who may be impacted by this talc-based, cancerous product.
Johnson & Johnson also plans on fighting back. The company says that they will continue to defend themselves against Echeverria and her lawyer. Every year, the large corporation faces thousands of lawsuits from people who claim they have talc-related adversities from their products. Most of these plaintiffs originate from California and Missouri. Echeverria's case was the first of the California claims to go to trial.
In Missouri, there have already been five trials against Johnson & Johnson. Out of the five, four awarded the plaintiff verdicts totaling over 300 million dollars. So far, Johnson & Johnson have only won one trial in Missouri.
The Supreme Court has been limiting where personal injury lawsuits can be filed
It seems like people think Johnson & Johnson hold much responsibility for harming people with its talc-based products. However, the Supreme Court has been watching closely. There have been questions raised concerning Supreme Court rulings that limit where someone could file personal injury lawsuits.
The Missouri case of Jacqueline Fox was also reversed recently by a judge
Recently, one Missouri court reversed a 72-million-dollar jury verdict made in February of last year. The case was against Johnson & Johnson and filed by a family of an Alabama woman who had died. The court ruled that the particular case should not have taken place in a St. Louis court.
The case was eerily similar to Echeverria's claims. Jacqueline Fox was a woman who had been using Johnson & Johnson baby powder for feminine hygiene for more than 25 years. Fox died several months prior to the trial, and she believed that the talc powder in the product was what gave her ovarian cancer that would ultimately kill her. Fox was 62 years old.
Many of the Missouri cases against Johnson & Johnson were filed by plaintiffs who originate from other states. The Supreme Court’s decision to limit where personal injury lawsuits can be filed directly impacts these trials by saying they aren't valid anymore, simply because they didn't take place in the state where the plaintiff's place of origin. Out of the 65 plaintiffs sharing Fox's case, only two were residents of Missouri.
Why are people flocking to Missouri to fight against the corporation?
It may seem strange that people from all over the country are choosing to congregate in Missouri to fight the large corporation in court. You might think that there is something fishy going on, or perhaps there's a belief that Missouri courts somehow rule more in favor of plaintiffs claiming personal injury. However, there was a good reason for why these cases took place in Missouri. Johnson & Johnson does a lot of packing and distribution of its talc-based products through a company located in Missouri.
Does talc really cause ovarian cancer?
Talcum powder is a mineral that contains elements of silicon, oxygen, and magnesium. The powder form is popular for hygiene products because it can absorb moisture and reduce friction. Its properties make it extremely helpful in keeping otherwise sweaty and humid body parts dry, preventing rash and odor.
Talc can be found in things like baby powder and facial powders. In its natural form, it's been known to contain some asbestos. This substance is known to be associated with cancer, especially when inhaled. However, since the 70s, it's been ensured that all products using talcum powder are asbestos-free in the United States.
There have been some questions as to a possible link between the powder and cancer. There isn't enough evidence to validate any of these claims, but there are very serious concerns if they end up being true. For one, people who have been exposed to these natural talc fibers have a higher risk of lung cancer from inhalation of these materials. Usually, these people are miners who get exposed to the mineral during work. Secondly, women who use talcum powder as part of their feminine hygiene seem to have a higher risk of ovarian cancer.
But are these claims really true?
So far, studies in lab animals have found mixed results regarding cancer formation in animals exposed to asbestos-free talc. So, from animal studies, we still can't conclude whether or not these products cause cancer or not. In human patients, it's been suggested that this powder is able to travel from the genital area to the ovaries and cause cancer. However, studies trying to expose such an association have come up with mixed results as well. Some report a slight increase in risk while others find no increase in risk at all. Many times, case-control studies have found a slight increase yet they are flawed by possible bias. These types of studies ask people to try to recall their memory of talc use years ago.
It's important to figure out whether or not this risk is real, but we don't have enough research yet. Scientists are working hard to continuing studying this association.
The American Cancer Society looks to other organizations for an additional opinion on whether cancer risks exist in certain products like talc. One particular agency, known as the International Agency for Research on Cancer, does a lot of work in this area and is committed to identifying carcinogenic materials. In regards to talc, they have broadcasted that the asbestos-containing powder is in fact carcinogenic. However, there lacks data to support any cancer-risk in talc powder that is asbestos free. In regards to its specific risk for women in developing ovarian cancer, so far, the agency has only classified the product as possibly carcinogenic.
Whether or not we know enough about talc powder to confidently claim its role in developing ovarian cancer, we should most likely avoid using it if we can. Most importantly, companies like Johnson & Johnson hold a responsibility to warn consumers of any ingredient it uses in its products, especially if it may cause anyone harm.
References
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/talcum-powder-and-cancer.html
http://www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/article179316896.html
