JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

Track this case

Case Number:

3:16-md-02738

Court:

New Jersey

Nature of Suit:

Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability

Multi Party Litigation:

Multi-district Litigation

Judge:

Freda L. Wolfson

Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART)

Sectors & Industries:

May 23, 2024
J&J Loses Expedited Bid For Beasley Allen Docs In Talc MDL

Johnson & Johnson has lost its bid in New Jersey federal court to have the Beasley Allen Law Firm quickly produce documents related to what J&J said seems to be an "intentional effort" by the firm to "bias the vote" against a proposed $6.5 billion reorganization plan for its talc subsidiary.
May 20, 2024
J&J Says Beasley Allen Looking To 'Bias' Vote On $6.5B Plan

Johnson & Johnson's bankrupt talc unit accused the Beasley Allen Law Firm of attempting to intentionally "bias" the vote against its recently announced proposal to pay out $6.5 billion in a prepackaged reorganization plan to resolve claims that its talc-based baby powder causes ovarian cancer.
March 25, 2024
J&J Exec 'Shocked' Over Atty's Ties With Talc Plaintiffs

Johnson & Johnson's vice president of litigation said on Monday he was "utterly shocked and appalled" upon learning an attorney who served as the company's outside counsel was working with its adversary Beasley Allen Law Firm and one of its attorneys in litigation over the alleged link between the company's talcum powder products and ovarian cancer.
December 20, 2023
Beasley Allen Atty Slams J&J's 'Locker-Room Brawl' DQ Bid

Beasley Allen Law Firm and one of its veteran plaintiffs' attorneys have hit back at Johnson & Johnson's attempt to disqualify them from multidistrict litigation over the alleged link between the company's talcum powder products and ovarian cancer, denying that they collected privileged information from a former J&J attorney.
June 17, 2021
Cosmetics Trade Group Escapes J&J Asbestos-In-Talc MDL

New Jersey's top federal judge has tossed claims against a nonprofit cosmetics trade association in multidistrict litigation over the alleged link between Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products and ovarian cancer, finding that the group does not have a "legal duty to consumers" to make sure the products are safe.
April 27, 2020
J&J Can't Boot Experts To Sink Asbestos-In-Talc MDL

A New Jersey federal judge on Monday largely rejected Johnson & Johnson's efforts to bar plaintiffs' experts from testifying that J&J's baby powder contains asbestos and that talc can cause ovarian cancer, opening a path to trials in the multidistrict litigation that contains thousands of cases.
September 20, 2019
J&J's Litigation Bravado In Sharp Relief After Epic Opioid Trial

Johnson & Johnson's decision this year to risk a $17 billion penalty in the nation's first opioid-crisis trial added one of the most dramatic chapters yet to the company's increasingly remarkable willingness to spurn settlements and litigate financially perilous cases all the way.
July 22, 2019
Test Tube Cancer Research Beats Animal Studies, J&J Hears

An ovarian cancer researcher defended his use of test-tube experiments instead of animal studies to examine the purported link between the disease and Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder, telling a New Jersey federal court Monday that his method was the "gold-standard" in the industry despite opinions otherwise.
July 15, 2019
J&J Slams 'Gross Mischaracterization' Of Talc Ruling

Consumers alleging Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder causes cancer have "grossly" mischaracterized a California state appellate court's finding in one woman's case by stating that the court overturned a ruling on general causation, the pharmaceutical giant fumed Monday in a filing in the ongoing multidistrict litigation.
December 21, 2017
Where 5 Top MDLs Stand At The End Of 2017

Multidistrict litigation dockets sizzled in 2017 with a spate of notable bellwether trials and a handful of attention-grabbing settlements, as well as centralization of litigation over some of the year's biggest corporate scandals.