Early this month, the highest court in the U.S. chose to leave in place the $2 billion jury verdict against Johnson & Johnson. They are the manufacturers of the talc powder that caused ovarian cancer in several women. While choosing not to hear the appeal filed by J&J, on Tuesday, June 1st, the Supreme Court justice’s failed to give their reasons.
Johnson & Johnson, in the argument presented to the court, stated they did not receive a fair trial. The company noted it was unfair to have received a single trial for 22 cancer patients from 12 different states and backgrounds. According to the National Law Review, J&J petitioned the court for a writ of certiorari to lay aside the Missouri Court of Appeal decision.
Two Supreme Court Justices with ties to the case chose not to join the decision to avoid a conflict of interest. With the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case, there is no more legal channel of appeal for the talc powder manufacturers.
The decision which the Supreme Court declined listening to was handed down in 2018 by a Missouri jury. The jury awarded the plaintiffs $4.7 billion after finding that J&J used asbestos-based talc in manufacturing their powder. But the state appeals court reduced the amount to $2 billion after determining not all of the 22 plaintiffs had legal standing to file a lawsuit of this nature in the state.
Johnson & Johnson talc powder is no longer on the shelves of stores in the United States and Canada but still sells in markets worldwide. As a J&J asbestos-based talc powder victim, If you have been harmed by J&J talc powder and your case meets legal requirements, you may be entitled to pursue compensation. Contact our mass tort attorneys to find out what these requirements are.
*This content is provided by Rueb Stoller Daniel, LLP, licensed attorneys in California with offices in San Diego, Los Angeles, and other California cities. This article discusses legal developments as of June 2021. IMPORTANT: Every case is unique and results depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each matter. The outcome described in this article does not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future case. Whether you are entitled to pursue compensation depends on establishing liability and damages under applicable law. Prior case results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The information provided is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For specific legal guidance about your situation, please contact our office for a consultation.
