A jury in California decided that Johnson & Johnson's baby powder was a "significant contributing factor" to the mesothelioma of Teresa Leavitt, and awarded her $ 29 million.
A jury of supreme court in Oakland, California, made the decision Wednesday, according to NBC. A lot of 13,000 similar cases have been filed across the country against the massive health care system. NBC reports that the company has "lost a number of lawsuits", including one year in Los Angeles, California, where a jury awarded a woman $ 25.7 million after claiming that the baby powder caused cancer. Also last year, a Missouri jury awarded $ 4.69 billion to 22 women who all said they had cancer after using the baby powder.
In response to the lawsuit, Johnson & Johnson issued a statement on the verdict, saying that the company is planning to appeal.
We are disappointed with today's judgment and will pursue an appeal because Johnson's Baby Powder does not contain asbestos or cancer.
There were serious procedural and evidence errors in the procedure that meant we were moving for mistrial at eight different points during the process. The plaintiffs' lawyers have initially not shown that Johnson's Baby Powder contains asbestos, and their own experts admit that they do not recognize the accepted definition of asbestos and ignore important differences between minerals that are asbestos and non-minerals. We respect the legal process and reiterate that jury values are not medical, scientific or regulatory conclusions about a product.
It is important that in recent cases there have been several defense judges and mistrusts. This story shows that there is a set of facts in these cases, and that decades of testing by independent, non-legal experts and institutions repeatedly confirm that Johnson's Baby Powder does not contain asbestos or cancer. We believe that these issues will guarantee a reversal upon complaint.
Despite the values, Johnson & Johnson claims that the baby powder composition does not contain asbestos, and set up a site called "Facts about Talc" to attempt to deprive the public of continuing to think of one of the most popular products containing the harmful mineral . It includes a section related to several studies conducted over several decades, which did not show an increased risk of ovarian cancer in women using baby powder.
Nevertheless, a corporate site has its own agenda, and juries did not believe that Johnson and Johnson's science in several verdict across the country.
Johnson and Johnson also claim on their "Facts about Talc" site that every sentence that has gone through the appeal process has been reversed.
"Furthermore, there have also been several trials where juries have concluded that Johnson & Johnson's product was not responsible for the plaintiff's cancer, and in other cases judges have rejected cases simply based on their own assessment of facts," the company says. 1